Sunday, November 06, 2011

The Tenth Point (of the Communist Manifesto) Part 6

by Al Benson Jr.

Here is more material, much of it taken from my own notes about the West Virginia book protest, made back in 1975.

To recap a bit, I refer back to Zach Montgomery, Assistant Attorney General of the United States back in the 1880s and his book, "The School Question." On page 133 of his book Montgomery stated (and his words should make every American parent shudder) "There is no kind or degree of communism so utterly revolting as that which, for educational purposes, virtually asserts a community of title, not only to the property, but also to the children of the private citizen. Yet this, unfortunately, is the communism of America; a communism having for its main trunk an educational system the most ruinously expensive and the most demoralizing that the world ever saw." Montgomery, a man believing in private education, could, as far back as 1886, see the direction the public schools were going in. His apt description of these "institutions of learning" could well be considered prophetic.

A personal friend and mentor, Pastor Ennio Cugini (now deceased) of the Clayville Church in Foster, Rhode Island, felt that Karl Marx, in the "Communist Manifesto" envisioned a public school system that would be the depository and the recorder of the gains made by the Communist world movement. Then, the worldview of the Communist movement, by the use of socialist-oriented textbooks, would be passed along to the students under the guise of "education." Pastor Cugini was right. Think about his comments for a moment. This is what was happening in Kanawha County when the parents revolted against the terrible textbooks. The parents, for the most part, did not realize all the implications of their revolt against the rotten texts, but those that promoted the use of those textbooks did--all the way back to Washington, D.C.

In 1974 I did not fully understand all the implications of this, and I asked myself, as I looked at the situation in West Virginia, why? Why here? I had found out that year that filthy and anti-American, pro-socialist textbooks were being used in public school systems in around thirty states across the country. To be sure, in many of those states, there were a handful of dedicated parents fighting against the evil being perpetrated by the public school system. But in most states they were only a handful. Not to belittle those folks--I asked God's blessing on their heroic efforts, and still do, because even if you do not realize it, this struggle still goes on, and if anything, it is even more intense now than it was in the 1970s, just in different ways. If you doubt that, try to get hold of the movie "IndoctriNation" which I mentioned in a previous article. It not only shows the continuous history of this sort of thing in public "education" but it shows how intensely this anti-Christ agenda is still being carried out today. Yet, what happened in West Virginia was different from what happened in other places, and I wondered why.

Early in the summer of 1975 my family and I had just returned from West Virginia. While there I got to take a good look at the area and to talk to people. We stayed with the Paul family in St. Albans, a fine Christian family that opened up their home to us when they knew we were coming to West Virginia. At that time, my experience in West Virginia had convinced me that there was a vestige of what really made this country so strong and independent still abiding in those hills in West Virginia. Within three months of this trip my family and I had moved to West Virginia.

Since that time, I have found out that there are still pockets of what made this country strong in the South, and in a few places in the West, but it is in the process of disappearing, thanks to the orientation provided by socialist textbooks in public schools that breaks down morals and then propagandizes students with socialist hogwash. This is what was happening in West Virginia in 1974. The textbooks that were to break down student morals were being put in place. The next step was socialist indoctrination.

In 1974 there were still many West Virginians that grasped the meaning of their God-given heritage. They cherished their God-given liberties and they were independent--all traits that have to be watered down or removed from students in public schools if the New World Order is to be successful.

In the November 17, 1974 issue of the "Charleston Gazette-Mail" there appeared an article about the textbook protesters entitled "A cling to yesterday's values." The main thrust of this article from what I could gather from reading it was, that the West Virginians who were protesting the rotten books were fighting a losing battle. They were trying to hold onto a set of values that simply didn't exist any longer. The article seemed to imply that the protesters were not living in the real world. This was simply because they took a stand for God and their children, even if they did not fully understand the insidious agenda of their adversaries. The values these folks stood for were the values this country was founded on. If those values were, and are, "yesterday's values" then this country is in deep trouble and may just not make it. And maybe part of the reason these values no longer seem to exist is due to what has been taught in public school classrooms for the past several decades.

Thursday, October 27, 2011

IndoctriNation the Movie

by Al Benson Jr.

Just a day or so ago I read an article on the Internet about how a public school principal in Oklahoma, of all places, is harassing a Christian group at the school he presides over. The write of the article noted: "This demonstrates how afraid schools are of anything to do with Christianity" and the writer wondered how Muslim or Hindu groups would have been treated under similar circumstances. They would have been treated a lot better than the Christians were. No doubt of that whatever. One thing I disagree with him about--the public schools are not "afraid" of anything to do with Christianity--they are openly anti-Christian, and their blatantly anti-Christian bias becomes more apparent to those who have eyes to see and have not buried their heads in the sand.

One night recently I watched the movie "IndoctriNation." I was impressed and think every family who has kids in a government (public) school should sit and watch this documentary. This points to what many of us have been saying for decades now--the public school system is anti-Christ, always has been, and makes no bones about it anymore. Christians need to sit and watch this movie, as too many of them have their kids in public schools and then the wonder why the kids leave the church when they graduate from high school. Most of them never figure it out, never even have a clue. This movie would be a real shocker for them. It might even awaken some of them from their bemused complacency.

Over all the years that my wife and I had our kids in Christian schools or home schooled them our chief opposition came from Christians who thought our kids would be much better off in some "good" public school somewhere--one that had a good sports program and a good band program. In one church in Indiana we attended the pastor even came and tried to talk us into putting our kids in the local public school. After I had given him all the reasons we could never do that he went home disappointed. I would dearly love for him to see "IndoctriNation." After I watched this movie, which is about 90 minutes in length, I thanked God we had been able to keep our kids out of the public brain laundries (schools) in the various areas we lived in. Our kids got a Christian education. It wasn't perfect because my wife and I are only sinners redeemed by the blood of Christ, and we made mistakes along the way. But when I look at what the public schools are and have been doing to kids, I am, again, thankful to the Lord that we didn't sell our kids' souls for the sake of a good band program!

The movie started off cataloging the problems people see in public schools today to some extent and it traveled in this vein for about twenty minutes. I thought, watching this part of it, that this is stuff most folks are somewhat aware of, and I hoped it would go a little deeper than this. It did not disappoint me.

Colin Gunn, the man who did the interviewing in the movie took his home schooled family all across the country in one of those infamous "little yellow prisons" (a school bus)as he talked with and interviewed people nationwide, school teachers, former school teachers, authors, parents, etc. There were several people in the film I know personally--Karl Priest, the head of Exodus Mandate in West Virginia, and Randy Murray, a former public school teacher in North Carolina. Both Karl and Randy have been teachers in the public system and after their experiences both have written books exposing the public school system for what it really is.

One necessary thing this film did was to expose the beginnings of the public school system as we now have it--Unitarian/socialist beginnings. Sam Blumenfeld, who has also written a couple books exposing the anti-Christ nature of public schools at their beginning was in the film and he did a masterful job pointing this out. Most Christian folks don't want to think that the public schools they so quickly entrust their kids to were founded by Christ-denying socialists like Robert Owen or men like Horace Mann, a Unitarian who rejected the Trinity and who wanted public schools so the state could control them and thereby denigrate the influence Christian schools had on society. Sam went into all this. This kind of information is where the rubber meets the road, and most Christians are just not willing to take the ride. Easier to leave the kids in public school and just pray for revival there--only when it doesn't come, who do you blame?

Billy Graham's son, Franklin, stood up for the public schools. Why am I not surprised? He said he wanted to see "trained Christian witnesses" among the kids there so we "could take our schools back." Rev. Graham should know better. Those schools were never, never "ours" to begin with. From day one they were the creation of Unitarians and socialists and had Rev. Graham done even superficial homework he should have known that. Bruce Shortt of the Southern Baptist Convention countered Rev. Graham's naive approach by urging parents to get their kids out of public schools, as did Presbyterian pastor R. C. Sproul.

There was one telling point in the movie that took place in a school board meeting in West Virginia, where, thanks be to God, there are still simmering remnants of the textbook protest of the mid-1970s. It showed an angry parent at a school board meeting protesting the obscene nature of a book his 11th grade daughter was required to read. As he went to read passages from the book he was informed by one of the school board members that he "couldn't read that here" because it was a rather vulgar passage. Interesting that what is required reading for an 11th grader in West Virginia is too obscene to be read out loud at a school board meeting. Does that begin to give you some vague clue as to what these schools are doing to your kids???

One attractive young Christian public school teacher was asked to resign because she had mentioned Jesus to her fifth grade class--and she was asked to resign that very day, and was escorted by the principal out the back way so the kids wouldn't see her leave--but leave she did--she had mentioned that unmentionable name, Jesus. That name is taboo in public schools unless used as part of a cuss word.

And then there was the classic shot of an official for a teachers' union giving a speech in which he very plainly stated that the agenda of his union had nothing to do with educating children--it was all about money and power. He was right.

There was so much solid ground covered in "IndoctriNation" that I cannot cover all of it in this article. You need to see the movie. It belongs in every church library in the country.

When I was first asked to consider writing a review for the movie I wanted to know where folks could get it. I was told that it is available at and also at Hopefully this will give you some place to start. I found information about it just from doing a Google search on the Internet. Please, get this movie, watch it, and pass it along to folks in your church, especially if their kids are in public schools. They need to see this, even if they'd rather not

Wednesday, October 19, 2011

The Tenth Point (of the Communist Manifesto) Part 5

by Al Benson Jr.

Some of what happened in West Virginia in 1974 (taken from my own notes made in early 1975)

In May, 1974, Mrs. Alice Moore, a member of the School Board, brought to the attention of the Kanawha County Board of Education and to the attention of Kanawha County parents, the content of the anti-Christian and anti-American textbooks that were about to be adopted for use in Kanawha County government (public) schools. As bad as some of the content of these books was they were adopted for use in Kanawha County schools on June 27, 1974 by the school board on a 3-2 vote. This was done in spite of the presence of over 1200 protesters who crowded the Board of Education offices and also stood out in the pouring rain asking that these books not be adopted. The adoption was done in spite of 12,000 signatures on a petition asking that these books not be adopted for use in schools by the Board. In the face of all this protest, on the recommendation of several English teachers, the books were accepted.

So much for the myth of parental input in government schools--and it is a myth.

During the month of June, 1974, a group called Christian American Parents was formed to try to combat the textbooks and their influence. In July, a department store, Hecks Inc. was picketed by parents. The man who was president of the store was on the school board and had voted to adopt the rotten textbooks. This was one method the parents had to legitimately protest his actions.

In August of 1974 a group led by Rev. Darrell Beech went to see the Superintendent of Schools, Mr. Kenneth Underwood, to ask him if he would remove the books. Mr. Underwood claimed his hands were tied--the books were legally adopted. Mr. Underwood claimed he could do nothing about the situation (did he even really want to?). The frustrated parents claimed they could do something. They could boycott the schools!

You have to realize that, at this point, the protesters had tried to do everything legally and properly and none of those in authority in any capacity were willing to help them.

It is interesting to note that Mr. Underwood, during an interview granted to the "Charleston Daily Mail" said, in regard to the books: "As a total literature program, I think it's great. There are some expressions I don't like, but I don't know if it's because they are filthy." While Underwood claimed he didn't really know if it was right to shove the books down the kids' throats against the parents' wishes, he balanced that thought off with one that contradicted it. He said "But, again, there is no way I can see these books have to be thrown out." That interview was published in the "Charleston Daily Mail" for October 12, 1974. In August Underwood's hands had been tied. He couldn't get the books out; they were legally adopted. However, by October, Underwood thinks the books as a "total literature program" are "just great." Either Mr. Underwood's thinking underwent a remarkable evolution from August to October, or, from his comments it appears he would not have tried to get rid of the books if he could have.

In August, 1974, another group, the Concerned Citizens of Kanawha County was formed. Also that August an anti-textbook group demonstrated at the governor's mansion. The governor was conveniently "out of town." Had the protesters been some sort of radical left-wing group he would almost certainly been on hand to welcome them with open political arms. Politicians are always on hand to toss out the welcome mat to the left-wingers, but for Christians and patriots they are almost always "out of town." The following week more protesters visited the governor's mansion. The honorable Governor still seemed to be "out of town." I suspect, had protesters visited the governor's mansion every day for the next year they would have been informed that he was on a year's sabbatical to Pago Pago.

The Tuesday before school started in 1974 there was an anti-textbook rally in St. Albans, West Virginia with about 400 present. These folks met and voted to boycott government schools until the rotten textbooks were out. It was now getting to the point where the local media had to say something and the local papers came out with the story (no doubt hoping to keep it local). However, a mass protest was planned at the Civil Center in Charleston, and on Thursday several thousand parents turned out, carrying signs and passing out printed excerpts from the questionable textbooks. That gave folks a real chance to see some of what was in the books. They didn't like it.

That Saturday about 7,000 protesters met at Point Lick Community Park. State police had to turn people away for lack of room and traffic was backed up for two miles! All this the very last week before school started! A few dedicated Christian patriots had worked away all summer to get the word out about what was really in Mr. Underwood's "great" literature program and their efforts bore fruit. From a handful they went to thousands in a few weeks and they did something in Kanawha County, West Virginia that ought to be done in every county and parish in the United States! Despite the rotten media coverage they got (and still get today in retrospect) the parents of Kanawha County succeeded in focusing national attention on a public school system such as no one else has been able to do, before or since.

What they did not realize at the time was that their own government, at all levels, would turn out to be their chief antagonist. The public school system was part and parcel of a grand design to undermine and destroy their faith and culture by brainwashing their children. That program continues to this day.

Friday, October 14, 2011

The Tenth Point (of the Communist Manifesto) Part 4

by Al Benson Jr.

Today we see a giant, monster public education bureaucracy, financed by Washington (with our money). There is, after all, nothing quite like financing your own destruction. Horace Mann and the Order notwithstanding, we have as much crime, poverty, and sin as we ever had--more in fact. We should be able to look back at how wrong Horace Mann was, intentionally or otherwise, and see how closely akin to Marxism his thought processes were. Mann was a beautiful example of what I call the Yankee/Marxist.

Undoubtedly due to his connections with the Order and under the influence of it, Mann worked diligently to free schools of their basically Christian and independent status and to put them under the thumb of government. His hostility toward Calvinism and the Reformed Faith in New England and against schools free of government meddling knew almost no bounds. In his view schools were only "free" once they experienced the "liberty" of state regulation. Before that they were captives to their own independence and the independence of the churches that ran them. This had to cease and Mann helped to make sure it did.

Some have said that Mann was naive about socialism, though with his connections to the Order I might question that. He was completely committed to a socialized order, of which the government-controlled school was the first basic part. The conversion of American education into a government-run instrument was the most dangerous step into socialism this country could have taken--and the sad tragedy of it was that Christians had been gulled into going along with and promoting it. They still do.

In the "Communist Manifesto" which hack writer Karl Marx wrote at the behest of the League of the Just (Illuminati) in 1848 (if you look at the first edition of the Manifesto it didn't even have Marx's name on it) you will see that Marx listed ten measures which Communists could use in varying degrees to accomplish the undermining and, hence, the eventual takeover of a nation by communism. The tenth point on that list is "free education for all children in public schools..." Can it not be said, then, that the government-run public school system is one of the measures of a communist society? That tenth point is the most insidious of all. So what Marx advocated in "The Communist Manifesto" Horace Mann had already set out to accomplish in the United States. Whether these two individuals were acquainted with each other or not, the damage has been done. Today we live with the results. Don't ever think that ideas from the past don't have consequences for you today.

Mann's contention that public education would cure all the social ills of the nation has been shown to be utter folly. Mann contended that by changing a person's environment you would change the person. He neglected to deal with the problem of human sin, which for him, did not exist. Hence his system of education will never do what he thought it would. The only answer for the problem of human sin is Jesus Christ and Mann had rejected Him as little more than a good moral example. He did not grasp that education without Christ does little more than to create clever devils. Whether Mann grasped this or not, those that influenced him did.

Going in the other direction, let us look at a man named Zach Montgomery. He was Assistant Attorney General of the United States, and in 1886, he published his thoughts on education in a book entitled "The School Question." Montgomery was an outspoken opponent of government-run education and he had done his homework. Montgomery showed with statistics that a relationship existed between state-run education and the rise in criminality, suicide, and delinquency--exactly the opposite of what Horace Mann had predicted! States which had most recently gone over to public schools showed a lower rate in each of these instances than states which had accepted public school education earlier.

Montgomery questioned the right of the state to even enter the field of education. He felt this was and should be a parental concern (the Bible makes this clear). The children did not and do not belong to the state, or to the Board of Education, yet the implication of a government-run education system were and are that they do.

This created a problem in West Virginia. Parents still thought their children belonged to them and not to the state. They had to be taught a lesson.

To be continued.

Thursday, October 06, 2011

The Tenth Point (of the Communist Manifesto) Part 3

by Al Benson Jr.

I expect, at this point, I need to shed a little light on the origins of the public, or government, school system. It is worth noting, contrary to the most vocal liberal opinion, that the "public school movement" in this country did not even exist until the 1830s.

Horace Mann (1796-1859) has been called the "father of the common schools." I have seen no history book to date that bothered to tell anyone that Horace Mann was a Unitarian, a member of a "Christian" denomination that denies the deity of Jesus Christ. Unitarians, especially in the New England states, were in the front lines of the struggle to implement compulsory public schools.

The Unitarians felt that Christian schools were backward. They felt that education must be concerned with "liberty" and that "liberty" came from the state, not from God. In their eyes, education, to fulfill its calling, had to be government-run. Mr. Mann felt that government-run schools would rid the nation of crime, poverty, sin, etc., within a century. Well, the century has passed, and guess what? To say that Mann's claim was erroneous would be a gross understatement.

Back in the mid-1970s historian Antony C. Sutton wrote a number of informative books, among which were "Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution" and "Wall Street and FDR." More material you won't find in the "history" books. In 1986 he wrote one, one of his last, called "America's Secret Establishment--An Introduction to the Order of Skull and Bones." We've all heard about several prominent politicians who belonged to it--George Bush, John Kerry I think, and many more--but they refuse to talk about it. It really is America's secret establishment. And as such, it is into the public school education program. You might say the Order has a vested interest.

In his book Sutton noted that "A tragic failure of American education in this century has been a failure to teach children how to read and write and how to express themselves in a literary form. For the educational system this may not be too distressing. As we shall see later, their prime purpose is not to teach subject matter but to condition children to live as socially integrated citizen units in an organic society--a real life enactment of the Hegelian absolute State. In this State the individual finds freedom only in obedience to the State, consequently the function of education is to prepare the individual citizen for smooth entry into the organic whole." No place for God or His Law in this setup--the man-made State is top dog.

Sutton observed that possibly the Order wants "citizen components" to be "little more than automated order takers;..." After all, citizens that can barely read or write are not too likely to challenge the Establishment. They are, to all intents and purposes, functionally illiterate.

It's also interesting to note that the "Look-Say" reading method that most of us were taught to read with in primary public school was developed around 1810 for deaf mutes. So why was it picked up and used for generations of children that did not have these problems?

According to Sutton, on page 83 of his book: "Horace Mann, whom we met in Memorandum Two as the promoter of 'look-say' reading was the first president of Antioch College (1853-1860). The most prominent trustee of Antioch College was none other than the co-founder of the Order, Alphonso Taft..Furthermore, Cincinnati, Ohio at that time was the center for a Young Hegelian Movement including famous left Hegelian August Willich, and these were well known to Judge Alphonso Taft." For anyone that has read the book Donnie Kennedy and I wrote "Lincoln's Marxists" (Pelican Publishing, Gretna, Louisiana) the name August Willich will ring a bell. He was one of Abraham Lincoln's Marxist generals during the War of Northern Aggression.

It seems that Mr. Mann, the "father of the common schools" had some interesting connections.

Could it be that the real purpose of the public schools was not to much to educate as to indoctrinate? That's the conclusion that Antony Sutton has arrived at and my research over the years has brought me to the point where I have to agree with his assessment.

To be continued.

Friday, September 30, 2011

The Tenth Point (of the Communist Manifesto) Part 2

by Al Benson Jr.

Here are some brief observations about the textbook controversy in Kanawha County, West Virginia made in the Summer of 1975 (shortly before we moved to West Virginia). When I originally wrote this, the textbook protest had been going on for something like ten months.

At that point, I supposed in years to come, many books and articles would be written on this topic. I felt some would try the objective approach, which must not be as easy as it seems, because most of what I have read about the protest was anything but objective.

I felt some would write from the viewpoint of the so-called "educational elite" and would seek to tear the book protesters to shreds in print. This has proved to be the case in most instances. Much of the so-called "news" media did exactly that right from the beginning and even decades later continues to do the same thing whenever the subject comes up.

It was, and is, interesting to note that the best efforts of the "news" media still could not keep many of us from finding out what really went on in West Virginia.

I guess it comes as no surprise for me to say that, from the start, I was for the textbook protesters. I made no bones about agreeing with their positon and what they did. I still don't.

I had been in contact, via phone and mail, with them since the Fall of 1974 and was finally able to go to West Virginia the following Summer and spend some time with them. At that point, I thought that the day would come when people all over the country would suddenly wake up and find out what the public, or government, school system they finance with their taxes is doing to their children.

I prayed, (and still pray) that when that day comes that more Americans will have the courage to do what the folks in Kanawha County, West Virginia did. As stated earlier, I originally made these observations in the Summer of 1975, half my life ago. I have seen growth in Christian schools and a surge in home schooling in all those years. I believe that somewhere in the neighborhood of 1-2 million students are now being home schooled in this country and it is now legal to do so in all states. That was not always the case. So progress has been made. However, we still see the majority of Christians sending their kids to what amount to government propaganda factories that we choose to call public schools and wondering why the kids leave the church by the time they leave high school.

In spite of all that has happened, most of the Christians still don't get it. In 1975 I wrote: "Somewhere along the line Americans have got to stand up for their faith, their children, their nation and its heritage or they will lose it all. West Virginia is standing up. How about the rest of America?"

Later, I found out that in 1975 there were something like seventeen separate book protests going on in the country. But, since some of them were not as widespread as the one in West Virginia, the "news" media were pretty much able to keep them under wraps except at the local level. They'd have done the same thing in West Virginia could they have managed it.

Over the decades I have observed the "news" media in action and believe me, for the most part, what they give you is not news, it is spin.

As I am able to in this series, I will comment on the foundations of the public school system in the United Stated and about the "father of the common schools" Horace Mann. But that will have to wait for the next installment.

To be continued.

Saturday, September 10, 2011

The Tenth Point

by Al Benson Jr.

Thirty seven years ago this year my family and I became involved in a historic event that was to help to change our lives and that has, in subtle ways, changed the direction this country has gone in.

It was the textbook protest in Kanawha County, West Virginia. Many don't even remember this event. Many others would just as soon bury this event under a pile of liberal verbiage that never has and never will give the protesters' side of the issue. This, unfortunately, is typical of the liberal/Marxist mindset. Their supposed tolerance extends only to those who espouse their views, while everyone else must be suppressed.

That is why the truth about what really happened in West Virginia at that time must be buried or shoved down the "memory hole." But the fly in the liberal ointment is that the truth refuses to be suppressed and it keeps resurfacing. And, if all truth ultimately comes from God, then even the liberals can't stop it.

The book protest in Kanawha County, West Virginia, which started in the Summer of 1974, was about one government school system among many, that sought to, under the false guise of "education" change the values of public school children so they would be more attuned to accepting the anti-Christian culture of the New World Order crowd. Christian culture in West Virginia was under attack, and the New World Order's adherents felt that if they could successfully push their agenda in West Virginia then they could probably get by with it anywhere.

In early October of 1974 my family and I had just returned from a trip to Oklahoma. As I sat reading the Sunday paper while waiting for supper to cook, I came across an article (this was in one of the Chicago papers) for which the headline was "Battle over the books in a Fundamentalist Lion's Den." That caught my attention. As I read the article and ascertained the instant media bias against the book protesters, whom I knew nothing about at that point, I commented to my wife that because of the obvious bias against them in the article "these protesters must be doing something right." Little did I know! However, in the weeks to come I found out. We got in touch with folks in West Virginia and we got involved as much as we could from a distance. The following year we moved to West Virginia.

When we first became involved in this historic event, I thought to write a book about it. I gathered all the information I could. Some folks handed me boxes of news clippings. The more I looked through all the material people had handed me, the more I realized I was just not equal to the task. In our various moves around the country much of this material disappeared. Years went by and I'd had no use for it.

But I recently came across one file of old notes that I had made while I was laboring trying to put a book together. Somehow they had survived all our moves and travels. These notes are now thirty seven years old and I have never had them in print. They are handwritten observations of what I saw (no portable computers back then). They are observations of what I saw, heard, and was told by the people who had experienced some of what happened. My family and I were involved in the protest for three years, one year while still living in Illinois and the other two years living in West Virginia, so my personal knowledge of all the events is limited. Yet I feel, having been there, that my thoughts and observations might, in some small way, help to contribute to the whole picture.

At this point, the most comprehensive work yet written pertaining to this critical period has been done by a man who was a public school teacher in Kanawha County, West Virginia all the while the protest continued. He has spent his life in West Virginia and so is acquainted with the area and its people much more than I.

His name is Karl Priest and he has written a book called "Protester Voices--the 1974 Textbook Tea Party." His book covers the protest, the reasons for it, and the personalities involved quite thoroughly from a Christian perspective. Having read his book, I highly recommend it. Whatever else you read about this protest (and there is now material on the Internet about it) balance it off by reading Karl's book.

It can be obtained from him by contacting him at 141 Karmel Lane, Poca, West Virginia 25159. The book, plus shipping cost is $19. If you care enough to find out the truth, it is worth the money and then some.

To be continued, Lord willing.

Thursday, September 08, 2011

"Conservative" news outlets ignore Ron Paul

by Al Benson Jr.

As we head into the presidential debate season I have been watching what the so-called "Conservative" news outlets, at least many of them, seem to be doing.

They are trying to set up a situation where the "conservative" candidates running for president are limited to Rick Perry and Mitt Romney, both of which would be acceptable to the Internationalist crowd. Most of your headlines spotlight these two paid-for 'conservative" turkeys while studiously ignoring Ron Paul and what he has to say about the economy.

You can tell that the Republican Party establishment is not about to let Ron Paul anywhere near the Republican presidential nomination--anyone but him! That being the case, you have to realize that Republican pretensions to conservatism are a sham.

The Republican Party started out in the late 1850s as a radical party, leaning to the left, while the Democrats of that day were the conservatives. Lincoln was no conservative. He was a friend and supporter of the leftists, who infested his armies and the Republican Party.

If you want proof get a copy of the book Donnie Kennedy and I wrote "Lincoln's Marxists" just recently published by Pelican Publishing. Check it out on Amazon and learn the real truth about the so-called "party of small government."

Tuesday, September 06, 2011

More Obama BF (bovine fertilizer)

by Al Benson Jr. Obama's popularity ratings are sliding, the economy is in a shambles due to his "efforts" to supposedly improve it--and this Thursday evening he is going to take care of it all--he will give yet one more speech. You have to wonder how often he will use the words "I" or "me" in his upcoming presentation. One of his favorite expressions when he gives a speech is "It's not about me" (when in his mind it really is). No matter what he says you have to realize that it is not his own agenda he is promoting. It is the agenda of George Soros and the Council on Foreign Relations crowd. Obama is a Marxist and his job while president is to so alter our economy that we can be successfully merged with the third world countries of the world. In other words, the agenda of his masters is to destroy the US economy while appearing to try save it. You must admit that, so far, he is succeeding admirably. So, Thursday evening, September 8th, he will get up and spout whatever words have been put in his mouth. I don't believe that, outside of patting himself on the back verbally, he even really cares what he says. It's not his script anyway. As long as he continues to follow the One Worlders' script they will allow him to remain in office. Should he ever deviate from that and think he can do his own thing, his real birth certificate (or lack thereof) will hit the headlines in the prostitute press and he will be gone in a flash. Anyone remember Nixon and Watergate? For awhile Nixon forgot that he was Rockefeller's man and began to think was really the president. Watergate was the result of that foolishness and eventually Nixon was gone. Obama is no Nixon. He won't last even that long if he refuses to tow the party line. He's not his own man and never has been. He is a New World Order mouthpiece, a political shill, and nothing more. Now this fact is even becoming apparent to those on the far Left. The more he rants about being "different" and wanting "change" the more he sounds like a lefitst version of George W. Bush and the more the agenda he has been given ti implement sounds like Bush's. We were supposed to be out of Afghanistan when??? If you expect anything other than the usual line of bovine fertilizer on Thursday you will be sorely disappointed. Comments welcome as long as they are polite. If you disagree express your thoughts in a courteous manner.

Saturday, August 20, 2011

Is Rick Perry Another Establishment Con Man?

by Al Benson Jr.

Those who have been able to do some political homework have come to the conclusion that both major political parties in this country are controlled by the Council on Foreign Relations/Trilateral Commission establishment. This has been the case for decades now. And those people have a view toward promoting one-world government that simply will not quit. Several years ago one of their paid lackeys told some who interviewed him that: "You will have world government whether you want it or not."

They have never deviated from that agenda. Having control of both major political parties in this country is part of their plan. It fools the American people into thinking they actually have a choice when they vote at the national level and most do not realize that, at that level, all they are ever getting are two possible variations of the same old one-world agenda--one served up with conservative rhetoric and the other dished out with liberal rhetoric, but no matter the rhetoric, the agenda does not change.

Ron Paul from Texas is running for president again. Outside of possibly Michele Bachmann and Herman Cain, he is the only honest candidate in the race. The rest seem to be party hacks who may well be running some kind of interference so that Obama can get re-elected. At this point, I believe the game plan is to put up the worst possible Republican candidate against Obama so he can pull off another "upset victory" giving us four more years of unvarnished Marxism. It wouldn't be the first time they've done that in either party. Should that scenario, for some reason, not prove doable they need a Republican hack that will beat Obama while still making sure the CFR/TC agenda gets implemented.

At all odds, they must make sure Ron Paul is almost totally ignored. They will get help there from the prostitute press, the same as in the last election. But then they will need what is perceived as some bigger-than-life figure, which they can slide into the main spot to take any possible spotlight off Ron Paul. They figure Rick Perry might be able to fill that bill for them. I have seen articles out there already that are touting him as the next Ronald Reagan. What most people fail to realize is that Reagan was no real conservative either. He was an actor. Most presidential candidates anymore are actors and they should get Oscars for their performances. Most of them are masterfully deceitful.

So, in peoples minds, Perry will be the new Ronald Reagan and they have been subtly programmed by the media to make this connection. Ive seen glowing articles of late about Perry's conservative views, and, of course, he is a Texan--but so is Ron Paul, but all the media ever says about him and comments about his "extremist views." Interestingly enough, you get the same reaction to Michele Bachmann. I looker her up on the Internet the other night and, without exception, every article on the couple pages I checked out took great pains to mention her "extremist views." After looking all these articles over I was tempted to wonder if one person hadn't written them all. The one salient point of all the stuff written about her was her "extremist views." I wonder if that is the new code term for conservatives and patriotic people. Interesting that all those folks the one-world establishment doesn't like are all extremists.

Last year, Janet Napolitano, one of Obama's left-wing extremists,tried to label all manner of ordinary folks in this country as extremists. You were an extremist and a possible terrorist if you home-schooled your kids, supported the US Constitution, went to church, were a veteran, believed in the Second Amendment, and so on and so forth. Undoubtedly the Marxist Obama regime considers anyone that would dare to oppose their collectivist agenda as a "right-wing extremist." In order to escape that title you have to be to the left of Ho Chi Minh or Fidel Castro politically--and even then you might not be far enough left for Obama. As for the Republican Party, they are little more than kinder, gentler, Marxists.

Donnie Kennedy and I in our book "Lincoln's Marxists" recently published by Pelican Publishing here in Louisiana show you the foundations of the Republican Party and, folks, they are far from small government or conservative.

So with the complicity of the lap-dog media, Ron Paul will be painted as a dangerous extremist while the establishment's paid hacks will all be tagged as "moderates". Of course, Mr. Perry will be labeled a "conservative" because he sounds conservative at this point. He attends Christian functions and sounds "evangelical" but so did Richard Nixon at one point, until we heard him cuss on the Watergate tapes, at which point the evangelicals were beside themselves with shock. Had they done any homework instead of just buying the rhetoric, they should have known, but they never do that. They're famous for siding with candidates who talk the talk but fail to walk the walk. This next election will be no different. The politicians have been fooling them for over four decades now that I am aware of, and getting away with it, so why should it change?

However, in looking into candidates' "conservative" credentials, one should look at Rick Perry's plan for the NAFTA superhighway. This was a project to consist of "a two-mile wide $184 billion transit system of toll roads, rail lines, and utilities from the Texas-Mexico border all the way up to the Minnesota-Canadian border. To make it easier to ship foreign goods from China and other countries into North America. It became so unpopular in Texas that the Texas portion of it, called the Trans-Texas Corridor, was renamed and mostly disbanded a couple years ago. Perry was the only gubernatorial candidate in 2006 of four major candidates who supported it. Even the Democratic candidate opposed it." This information from Rachel Alexander, editor of the "Intellectual Conservative." I had also read where Oklahoma had said they would not build this road through that state either.

This is probably a major part of Perry's career he would prefer to have forgotten, and if he ends up being the Republican candidate of choice, you can be sure all this info will be stuffed down the memory hole, along with any other liberal actions he ever partook of. All this to say that Mr. Perry is not what we have been led to believe he is. But he still may be foisted on a gullible, public-school-educated populace as "Mr. Conservative" in the 2012 election just as Ronald Reagan was in 1980. You should always remember in Reagan's administration who the vice-president was--George "New World Order" Bush.

If you really want to look for viable candidates in this next election, check out all those that the prostitute press labels as "extremists." They will probably be the only honest candidates in the bunch, while the rest will be nothing more than bench-warmers for the New World Order.

Thursday, July 21, 2011

Trashing the Economy--on purpose!

by Al Benson Jr.

I have not always agreed with all the positions promoted by David Horowitz, head of the David Horowitz Freedom Center in Sherman Oaks, California, but in this instance, regarding his take on Obama and the economy, I think he has hit the nail on the head. I have not seen anyone else come this close.

I've watched all the conservative pundits gasp in shock at what Obama seems to be doing to the economy, and to the cultural condition of the country in general. Many of them look at particular parts of his agenda and exclaim "Doesn't he realize what this will do to the country?" Of course he realizes it. That's why he's doing it. Somehow that glaring fact never seems to fully register with much of his opposition. Many of his conservative opponents almost seem to have a deer-in-the-headlights approach to his agenda. They view it in living socialist color, but act as though they can't quite believe it. Makes you wonder. Are some of them that dumb, or do they think their audience is?

Recently, Mr. Horowitz sent out a short Internet missive in which he asked the question "Is the President trying to strain the American economy to the breaking point?" Good question. Mr. Horowitz already knows the answer and he is trying to get his audience to grasp it.

Like Mr. Horowitz, I concluded some time ago that Obama's agenda, (not really his but that of the shadow government behind his throne) was to destroy the country economically, spiritually, and in every other vital or important way. You can reach no other conclusion when you look at his solutions for "reviving the economy" which are nothing more than the same old tired socialist solutions that were used to get us into this mess. He almost seems to be saying "If this failed, then let's do more of it to fix the problem."

Obama's agenda, (and again, that of those behind his throne) seems to be to lower the living standards in this country to those of the third world countries and then to raise the standards of those countries so that the United States can be successfully merged into the third world. This is really no different than the programs of various tax-free foundations in this country back in the 1950s and 60s. Their aim was to lower the standard of living in this country so we could be successfully merged with the Soviet Union. Is there much difference between that and what Obama is doing, via directives from his puppeteers (George Soros and the CFR)?

Mr. Horowitz, like me, doesn't see much difference, and he notes in his comments: "If you think the last question is improbable it is only because you haven't read the plan of two Marxist professors from the 1960s who hatched the plan to 'stress the system' so that a leftwing government can take more control over our lives and make America a place we will no longer recognize as home. These two professors, Frances Fox Piven and Richard Cloward (whose work Obama learned about as a young 'community organizer' in Chicago) envisioned an activism that would flood the housing market with bad loans, overwhelm the electoral system with the names of dead and fictitious voters, and give a toxic shock to the health care industry by adding millions of people to the rolls with their bills to be paid for by the taxpayer. They wanted all this to happen so that America would be forced to embrace socialist solutions." Can anyone honestly say this isn't happening today?

It does sound somewhat familiar doesn't it? You've probably never heard of these two left-wing professors, but that doesn't mean their work has not affected the way you and your family are being forced to live right now. Most people have never heard of the Council on Foreign Relations either, but that does not mean that this organization hasn't been a major force in this country, during all administrations for decades, to move this country to the left and to grease the skids here for a one-world government. Mostly it means that folks do not find out about these organizations and people because they are deliberately mis-educated or undereducated. Does than mean that the government schools are part of this too? You better believe it baby--in spades!

Mr. Horowitz's organization is distributing a pamphlet called "Breaking the System." To find out more about this check out their web page at

It was refreshing to see that someone out there recognizes the fact that Obama and his handlers are purposely trashing the system and that all their seemingly stupid moves are really part of a grand design to trash the country. Even many of their so-called "conservative" opponents seem to fail to grasp his.

Friday, July 15, 2011

The Debt Ceiling Dog And Pony Show

by Al Benson Jr.

For weeks now we have been treated to nightly doses, via our lapdog media, of scary articles about the national debt ceiling. The current Marxist administration, parading as Democrats, are telling us our national house of cards will come tumbling down on August 2nd if they are not given, by Congress, the ability to further increase the already horrendous debt our great grandchildren and their grandchildren will be paying off because of licentious federal spending. The Republicans have boasted they will not vote to increase the debt limit no matter what. They claim to be holding firm to their commitment to cut federal spending, and so on and so forth, blah, blah, blah.

I hate to be the purveyor of negative information, but they are both lying through their teeth to the American public, who, thanks to their public school "educations" can't tell the difference.

Recently Obama did an interview with Scott Pelley, one of the talking heads at CBS (two talking heads chattering at one another). According to Pelley said: "Can you guarantee, Mr. President, that if there's a shutdown, can you personally guarantee that Social Security checks will go out for seniors?" To which the Great One replied: "I can't, Scott, I'm glad you asked me that. I can't guarantee, and not just the old people, Scott, it's veterans too. I can't guarantee it. Those checks probably won't go out." I'll bet Obama was glad that Pelley asked him that question. It was probably part of the script. It gave him a little bit of economic terrorism to spread among us older folks, a little something to scare the living daylights out of us--as it was intended to do.

Can you picture the thousands upon thousands of older folks, living on only Social Security, calling or writing their congresspersons and telling them to vote to raise the debt ceiling so they won't starve next month--and thereafter? It's a diabolical political ploy used by the current Marxist administration to get what they want, claiming it's what the public really wants because of the public outcry. It gives Congress, both Republicrats and Republicrats (because there really ain't a dime's worth of difference between them) the excuse to do what most of them really wanted to do all along.

So, if the government really shuts down and Social Security checks and veteran's checks fail to go out, does that mean that congressional paychecks will also not go out? After all, if no one else gets their checks, why should they? But that will only happen in your dreams, Charlie. Those parasites will continue to feed at the public trough even if the public starves!

If Obama doesn't just try to raise the ceiling through some "executive order" (his favorite way of doing everything he can't get done legitimately) and Congress does get to vote on it, will the debt ceiling be raised? Will Congress vote for it? Of course they will--this time, next time, and for many more times to come. Both sides already know this. The only folks who haven't figured it out yet are the public-school "educated" American citizens. It's their gut feeling it shouldn't happen. They realize, at some level, that this will cost them the family farm (literally). What they don't realize is that the Feds are playing them like a fiddle and laughing all the way to the bank.

It's all about power and redistribution of the wealth (our wealth redistributed to the Marxists and their friends in power. That's what Marxism is always all about, regardless of their lofty pretensions about "power to the people." No one ever thinks to ask them "which people?"

So not to worry, if Obama doesn't do the executive order bit, Congress will do a deal in such a way that the Marxists get what they want, while making it look like the Republicans opposed it, and it will be business as usual in Sodom on the Potomac. The public will get stiffed. But is that anything new? That has been going on at least since Abraham Lincoln and as long as the public remains dumbed-down it will continue.

Only when the public gains enough knowledge to start demanding candidates with strong moral standards, Christian standards, in those they elect will things begin to change. That means that maybe the churches ought to set some moral standards for those their parishoners vote for. We aren't there yet.

Thursday, June 30, 2011

Gun Control In Obamaworld (It's good for the economy)

by Al Benson Jr.

In the convoluted environs of Obamaworld, where sodomy and abortion are hailed as daring and courageous, while Christian virtue and purity are denigrated, gun control is a sign of a healthy economy.

This may sound a bit off-the-wall to normal folks, but, then, you have to understand the mindset of the denizens of Obamaworld and those they front for. Like Marxists, they just don't think like ordinary people. In Ohamaworld there are two classes of people; the criminal class, consisting of both politicians and common criminals, and normal, honest citizens, who, according to the criminal class, live only as sheep to be sheared. Or, as the Mexican bandit said in the movie "The Magnificent Seven" about fifty years ago now--"If God did not want them sheared He would not have made them sheep." Not that I agree with that statement, but it does seem to express the mentality and worldview of criminals, political and otherwise.

I guess we should try to understand this situation from the criminal's perspective. If common crooks break into someone's house and that someone happens to be armed, they might get hurt, even dead in some cases, as recently happened in a nearby city here in Louisiana, where a burglar broke into a house that happened to be inhabited by a deputy sheriff. According to the odd logic of the inhabitants of Obamaworld, the deputy should have thrown down his gun, begged for mercy, and immediately retreated to hide in the nethermost part of his abode. Instead, heartless beast that he was, the deputy shot the burglar. I am sure the ACLU will attempt to find some way to nail the deputy's hide to the judicial wall while trying simultaneously to find a way to reward the burglar posthumously for his courageous act against the "establishment" and in behalf of "the people." You see, in Obamaworld, it's just not nice to resist evil, only good. You know how it is--evil is good, slavery is freedom, and all that.

When Obama ran for president he told the cheering masses he didn't want to take their guns away from them. Since his administration is on record for trying all manner of ways to discourage people from exercising their Second Amendment rights, you have to wonder just who he was talking to when he said he didn't want to take away "our" guns. Who were the "our" he was addressing? Certainly not everyday, honest citizens. He'd confiscate their guns in a heartbeat if he could finagle a way to do it. Not to worry, though, his secretary of state is working of that little problem. The plan is to curtail the Second Amendment via the United Nations, which I'm sure they've been instructed to do by their handlers. As for Obama, he is little more than an empty suit waiting to be filled with the rhetoric of those who really give the orders.

You also have to grasp the fact that the criminal class usually doesn't want to work for a living. That's why they go into politics, robbery or larceny. It's much easier to rip other people off than to sweat all day doing honest work, and to do that, the crooks need firearms for their line of "work." And their work is much easier if they don't have to face any armed resistance (healthier too). So gun control laws work just great for the criminals, and the political crooks who are their kissin' cousins, try to make sure there is as much gun control as possible in as many places as possible. After all, if common crooks can't burgle or rob, how will they make ends meet? But if they can steal and plunder with no armed resistance, why then, they can usually make a go of it financially, and, as they peddle their stolen goods to those who will fence those goods for them and resell them, they have made their fair contribution to the Obamanite economy. See how well this all works--if we can just get more gun control.

Those politicians who loudly howl and protest about crime in the streets, and the need to take honest people's guns away to "prevent crime" are well aware of how this dog and pony show works. Most of them are far less concerned with "crime in the streets" than they are about their criminal friends meeting armed resistance as they labor to redistribute our wealth. In Obamaworld, redistribution of the wealth is really where it's at. You say that sounds Marxist? The "news" media will tell you that is pure coincidence!

Our honestly-earned wealth needs to be redistributed to the criminal class, both political and common, while the "news" media continues to inform us that we should all be thankful to be able to pay our "fair share" to keep the current (or past) corrupt and tyrannical regime going. After all, if you can't trust your government.....?

Since a good friend once told me I was ancient, you can bet I have heard all this before--over and over. I've even heard some folks in churches tell me about how our "contributions" to the IRS are our "fair share" which we should gladly pay for the privilege of being stiffed by the politicians. I wish I could at least say the politicians stiffed us with a bit of class, but I can't even say that. They can't even get a forged birth certificate done right!

And don't think for one minute that the political criminals in Washington really heard your protests or felt your pain before the 2010 elections. Such belief qualifies you for a $100 gift certificate from the Easter Bunny for a hunk of green cheese off the moon--after the purple cow jumps over it! All you have to do is to look at the results we've had since the election to realize that the political criminals are laughing all the way to the bank--your bank--as they siphon off anything you might have left. Congress is already getting set to raise the debt limit, again, the next of many such ongoing raises, and they're looking for ways that enable the Republicans to go right along with this without appearing to do so. Undoubtedly they will find such if they haven't already. Political criminals are not only Democrats. Look at Lincoln!

Needless to say, it's past time that people in this country, most especially in the churches, woke up and realized how they (and their grandchildren) are being and will be fleeced. But, given past performances in my lifetime, I ain't holding my breath until that happens.

Saturday, May 28, 2011

That Mississippi State Flag Really Gives The Liberals Fits

by Al Benson Jr.

Ten years ago now, after being subjected to a massive liberal disinformation campaign, aided and abetted by spineless Mississippi politicians, the good people of Mississippi voted to keep their current state flag, Confederate symbol and all, by a whopping two-thirds to one third vote. They sent a resounding message to all the politically correct busybodies across the country--don't mess with our state flag, we like it fine just like it is.

Needless to say, with a vote like that, the liberals and leftists nationwide engaged in much "weeping, wailing, and gnashing of teeth." How dare their wonderful multi-cultural agenda for unenlightened Mississippi be resisted by the people who lived there! Who did they think they were, resisting what the liberals and other cultural Marxists clearly knew was best for them? The ungrateful wretches!

However, liberals, cultural Marxists and their ilk being what they are (meddlers) they just have not been able to let this issue alone. A couple or three years ago, if I remember correctly, they tried again, with some sort of "discussion groups" to get people interested in another flag. That didn't seem to go anywhere, so now they are back for yet one more go-round.

Just recently there was a fuss over the state flag in Natchez, at the police department. Someone asked the police chief if it was alright to fly the state flag and the police department. The police chief complied. Why not? It is, after all the state flag, even if the liberals are offended by it (poor babies). Then, lo and behold, someone came along and complained to the mayor, who ten ordered the police department to take the flag down until "the city could discuss the matter more carefully." That's political talk for tucking tail and running.

The man that wrote the editorial from the "Natchez Democrat" that I read, although he claims the flag doesn't bother him, is nonetheless subtly trying to push for a new flag design. So here we go again! In his article he wrote: "Rationally, it makes sense to find a flag that all Mississippi citizens can support and rally around." Sounds nice, but it will never happen. No matter what flag design you come up with, somebody won't like it. Someone will be dissatisfied and complain.

In his article the writer continues: "If, as the 2001 vote indicates, more than one-third of the state voters don't support the existing flag, we should seek to find a more universally supported symbol." Translation: The liberals don't like the current flag with its Confederate symbol so it has to go. They tried once and couldn't get rid of it so it's now time to try to bamboozle the public again to see if they can do away with it. After all, it's been ten years, so who'll remember all the disinformation we spread around back then? Time to spread it on thick again!

It seems to pain the editorialist greatly that the one-third of the people that didn't vote for the flag should be subjected to having to see it fly in their state. What about the two-thirds that voted to keep it? Should they be subjected to a new flag they clearly don't want just to keep the one-third from griping and moaning? It would seem so.

When it comes to Confederate symbols the liberal and leftist minority is always more important than the conservative majority, because the liberal minority are the politically correct ones, while the conservative majority, who mostly just want to be left alone to live their lives, and supposedly too dumb to know what's good for them.

So to the good folks in Mississippi--get ready, because they are probably going to have another go at taking the state flag you want to keep away--and you can bet the farm that your gutless politicians won't help you unless you really hold their feet to the fire.

Sunday, May 01, 2011

Folks, Here’s Obama’s “Genuine” Birth Certificate--after two years of hiding it

Folks, Here’s Obama’s “Genuine” Birth Certificate--after two years of hiding it

By Al Benson Jr. and Daniel Benson

We’ve been reading for almost two years now about the fact that Obama was pointedly ignoring requests for a real birth certificate to be released. In fact he spent around $2 million making sure none of his records were released, right on down to Kindergarten.

WorldNet Daily made a big splash about the fact that you couldn’t find any information on this individual that currently resides in the Red (White) House and they even paid to put billboards up around the country asking pointedly “Where’s the Birth Certificate?” Others picked up on this and ran with it also. No response from our Marxist-in-Chief except an occasional sneer, which he’s pretty good at.

Then along came Donald Trump, supposedly running for president, probably as a RINO. He started complaining about Obama’s lack of a valid birth certificate, and lo and behold, Obama shoves one out this past week. Trump claims credit for getting one posted when no one else could.

However, looking at the Great One’s new “authentic” birth certificate, it seems that there are some problems with it. For instance, line 9 on the certificate lists Obama’s father’s race as “African.” Slightly ambiguous. What about white folks born in Africa? Aren’t they Africans too. If they and their families have lived in Africa then they should qualify as African also. Besides, in 1961, when this new, “genuine” birth certificate was supposed to have been issued they would have used the term Negro or black instead of African.

On line 7, his birthplace is listed as Honolulu, Hawaii. Back in 1961 they listed the particular island you were born on, which was Oahu. Other birth certificates issued around the same time list Oahu as the birthplace, not Hawaii.

The Dept. of Health number on his birth certificate is a higher number than that on the birth certificate of children born the day after he was. These numbers are issued sequentially, so his number should have been lower, not higher.

We’ve read several comments from folks who work with photography and several claim his birth certificate has been “photo shopped” a process whereby date is erased from a document and other material added on via a transparency and the whole thing is then photographed over again with the new information showing up instead of the old. Different sources gave us about fifteen different things wrong with this new “genuine” Obama birth certificate.

The conclusion, overall, is that Obama has done nothing to quell the fuss over his birth certificate. Rather he’s added fuel to the fire. That, plus the fact that it wasn’t very well done. Federal forgers should have been able to do a much better job than whoever churned out this piece of work.

But now the liberal media can assure us that we have what we wanted and that it was all much ado about nothing. Either the media and the president think the American people are totally stupid, or there was some other reason for this “genuine” birth certificate to appear when it did. Is its timely appearance really timely, or is it a sort of subtle attention-getter?

Is it possible that all the fuss over the birth certificate, pro and con, right now is a device to cover up something else the administration might be wanting to slip in, under the radar, so to speak?

Last week we read an article posted on that mentioned the possibility of Donald Trump being connected to Obama’s puppeteer, George Soros. In part, the article stated: “In December 2001 the New York Post mentioned a private party hosted by Roubini and Oliver Stone, George Soros and Donald Trump.” Recently when Glenn Beck asked Trump about George Soros, Trump replied “Forget Soros. Leave him alone. He’s got enough problems…let’s talk about somebody else, sweetheart.”

Yet now, along comes Trump and Obama practically jumps out of his skin to get a “genuine” birth certificate out there for the gullible public. Baby, something smells rotten--and it ain’t in Denmark. Trump, Soros, Obama--we’ve got a hunch something is going on that the American people need to be aware of and are not looking for, thanks to all the hoopla about the birth certificate.

Tuesday, March 08, 2011

Jesse Jackson Jr. and the War Between the States Sesquitennial

by Al Benson Jr.

A recent headline in our local paper noted that "Democrats Push for Civil War Bill." It would seem, to the casual reader that the Democrats in our august Congress have suddenly become aware of their "duty" to commemorate the War Between the States as an event that changed our form of government in this country from that of a Republic to that of a consolidated democracy. True? Not hardly! But the Democrats are pushing hard for a federal commission to "commemorate" the 150th anniversary of the War.

So, why, you might ask, are they so interested? Perhaps a comment by Andrew Wilson, a spokesman for Rep. Je$$e Jackson Jr. of Illinois has let the cat out of the bag when he said: "It's important for the country to have an open, honest discussion about the war, including the reason it occurred." Please note that Mr. Wilson didn't refer to the "reasons" that it occurred. In his comment the word "reason" was singular. That should be a clue to the historically astute as to where this whole thing is going.

What these Democratic Congressmen really want is a federally sponsored committee that will broadcast far and wide that the only "reason" for the War Between the States was slavery. Their version of an "open, honest, discussion" will probably end up being a four-year-long harangue about slavery, and nothing else, being the sole reason for the War and how we all need to repudiate our "racist" attitudes (while they get to keep theirs).

All the things mentioned in the "news" article, the 13th Amendment, Lincoln's war propaganda measure, charitably called the "Emancipation Proclamation" (which never freed a single slave)--are geared to dealing only with the slavery issue to the exclusion of all the other issues.

If we are really to have an open and honest discussion about the reasons for the War that would be great. But, folks, let's be honest. After 150 years of Yankee/Marxist propaganda at all levels, you have to know that ain't gonna happen--no way!

To engage in that sort of dialogue would force people to deal with all the reasons for the War--the tariff issue, the cultural and theological differences between North and South, differing views of the Constitution between North and South, and the issue of states rights, and not just the right to own slaves. Only the truly ignorant confine states rights to that issue.

Trying to uncover the reasons for the War only through the tunnel vision of the slavery issue is an exercise in futility. Trying to reduce the varied and complex reasons for the War into the least common denominator of slavery does a historical disservice and injustice to all Americans.

Unfortunately, in the name of suppressing the truth, that's the real name of the game.

Monday, February 21, 2011

Ali Baba and the Forty Public School Students

by Al Benson Jr.

The government school systems in post-America continue their mad plunge into anti-Christianity, while most people that have subjected their children to these mind-numbing institutions do not have a clue as to what really goes on in them.

With all that has occurred in past decades in these "institutions of learning" you would think that folks nationwide would have some sort of grasp of their true nature. Sadly, this does not seem to be the case.

Recently, in Texas of all places, a branch of the government school system, the Mansfield School District, had planned to institute a mandatory Arabic language and culture class. Arabic and Mandarin were to be added to the curriculum and designated as "languages of the future." When the public schools start telling you that Arabic is the "language of the future" stop and ask yourself what the language of the past might be. Bet you two to one that English heads the top of whatever list the school change agents have compiled. Does that fact give you a slight hint as to where some of our public (government) schools are headed during the era of the Great One?

Apparently there has been enough of a fuss over this in the Mansfield School District that the school system there has put off making a final determination as to whether they will try to force the Arabic class on students or not. What that means is that they will wait until the furor has died down and then try to slip it in quietly, a little more quietly, than they did this time. Public school systems have been using that tactic ever since the massive textbook protest in Kanawha County, West Virginia back in the middle 1970s. Unfortunately, it usually works.

According to an Internet news article by Sheryl Young: "In 2002 some California middle schools structured workshops on Islam in an attempt to ease fears about the faith after the terrorist attack of 9/11/01. According to the Hudson Institute, students were instructed to memorize Islamic phrases, verses from the Koran, and Islam's Five Pillars of Faith. While the website states that what went on in these classes was exaggerated in some areas, school authorities confirmed that teachers could include having students dress in Islamic garb and learn prayers to Allah." How informative! Had someone suggested that these students learn Bible passages there would have been a hue and cry from the ACLU and every teacher's group and union in the country about the violation of the "separation of church and state" (which they claim is in the Constitution, but which I have never been able to find in there, nor have many others). However, if the prayers the students were going to learn were to Allah, why that was okay. You see it's only a violation of the "church/state separation" if Christianity is involved. In the case of every other religion, a free pass is given. I could have hoped that, over the years, this fact would have begun to sink in and thus give people a slight glimpse of the real nature of the public school system, but this doesn't seem to be the case for the most part.

Folks who really think they are going to reform the public school system might as well whistle Yankee Doodle all the way to the poor house. It ain't gonna happen, so quit fooling yourselves and attempt to grasp the fact that you, if you want a real education for your kids, have got to remove them from the government schools and find alternative education for them. Christian schools and home schooling are viable options for many if only they will take the time and trouble to check into these.

As for government schools being "reformable" many of the folks who have assured me they are not have been public school teachers or former public school teachers who have learned the hard way that real reform of the system will never happen.

I remember, when I worked for a home schooling program in Illinois years ago, I talked to a lady on the phone one day from New York, who was a public school teacher. I never forgot her comment. She wanted her daughter to be home schooled and she told me "I work in this system every day. No way is my daughter going to become part of this." When a public school teacher says that about the school system she is part of, that's about as graphic a testimony as you can get. I never forgot her comments. You shouldn't either, if you want your kids educated instead of brainwashed.

Wednesday, January 26, 2011

The Missing (non-existent?) Birth Certificate

by Al Benson Jr.

Having followed the whole "birther" scenario on the Internet regarding Comrade Obama's real birth certificate (or lack thereof) has been an exercise in futility. Obama's former press secretary and paid propagandist, Robert Gibbs, openly laughed at those who wanted to see a legitimate birth certificate for Obama rather than that paper charade that has been posted on the Internet. Gibbs is gone now, for whatever reason. Small loss.

Those that brought lawsuits into many courts in the land demanding to see proof of Obama's place of birth were routinely dismissed by judges who probably know what the game is in Washington and who are not about to jeopardize their legal careers by doing what is right. They found technicalities in each case that allowed them to dismiss them all without dealing with the real issue--was Comrade Obama born in this country or not??? Obama has spent big bucks keeping any real records about anything regarding himself hidden from public view. Ain't "transparency" wonderful?

WorldNet Daily has spent much time and effort following this situation. In fact, they have paid to have billboards put up around the country that just ask "Where's the birth certificate?" The "news" media, in its true "investigative" spirit has ignored all this where it could and made fun of it where it couldn't.

But, on January 24, 2011 there was an article on WorldNet Daily by Jerome Corsi that was quite revealing. Mr. Corsi stated, quite plainly that: "Former Hawaii elections clerk Tim Adams has now signed an affidavit swearing he was told by his supervisors in Hawaii that no long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate existed for Barack Obama Jr. in Hawaii and that neither Queens Medical Center nor Kapi'olani Medical Center in Honolulu had any record of Obama having been born in their medical facilities." We've been told in the past that he was born in one, or both of them. So which is it? With no records, most likely it's neither. Does that surprise anyone anymore?

And, according to the article, Adams stated: "and there was no record that any such document had ever been on file in the Hawaii Department of Health or any other branch or department of the Hawaii government." Interestingly enough, when this furor all started, Adams was one of a dwindling number that believed that Obama was born in Hawaii and that he is a legitimate citizen of the United States. Wonder how he feels now that he has signed this affidavit and had it notarized.

I would urge folks to go to WorldNet Daily's web site and check out some of the stories concerning Obama's birth certificate and related subjects. There is a list on that site, as long as your arm, of articles that deal with this.

If the man currently in the White House (and maybe with his leftist politics we should rename it the Red House) is not legally a United States citizen, and he is allowed to continue in office, then we will have set a precedent for future presidents. Who needs to be a citizen of the US in order to be president? No one, as long as he covers his tracks well enough! Our socialist Congress was notably derelict in its duty on this one--and I suspect that was the intention.

Comrade Obama--where IS the birth certificate--here, or someplace in Kenya or Indonesia? A suspicious public would like to know, but I'll bet you and the media ain't telling.

Monday, January 10, 2011

John Boehner Has No Problem With Federal Programs

by Al Benson Jr.

Recently, new Speaker of the House, John Boehner, was asked what federal programs needed to be cut now that Republicans had taken control of the House. Boehner's reply should be a cause for concern for all those that label themselves conservative, libertarian, or Tea Party.

Boehner said that, off the top of his head, he couldn't think of a single federal program he would cut. Now maybe I misunderstood, but I thought that, in this recent election, the voting public tossed out a whole bunch of Democratic Marxists (yes folks, they are Marxist in their mindset) because they wanted government to cut spending and to be more accountable to the public. Now we realize that, no matter what he said, Obama and his Marxist and socialist friends in Congress didn't get the message. Anyone with a Marxist mindset is incapable of understanding the concept of limited government and Comrade Obama is no exception. However, some of us had fond hopes that some of the Republicans just might have gotten it. Such hopes seem about to be dashed, as Boehner doesn't seem to be one of those that got it.

Seeing that Mr. Boehner can't think of any federal programs he's like to cut or eliminate, I will pass along to him a short list of some we could drastically reduce or flat out do without. Maybe this will give him some food for thought (though I doubt that). I am afraid Mr. Boehner will end up being one of the "business as usual" boys that we thought we had voted out but really didn't, no matter which party is in power. In actuality, the two major parties are little more than different ticks on the same One World hound.

But, if Mr. Boehner ever got to the point where he could begin to meditate on some government programs that could be cut, here are a few places he could start that would save billions.

Cut back the Food Stamp program. Most of us don't object to giving a helping hand to those that, for one reason or another, are unable to make it on their own, but there are lots of people in this program that could make it with some effort, but would prefer to let us keep paying their way. These people should be culled out and sent packing!

How about opening some parts of the Arctic Wildlife Refuge for oil exploration? Contrary to much of the eco-insanity that passes for science today, this would not destroy the caribou or other wildlife, if done carefully, and, Heaven knows, we could use the oil with $4.00 a gallon gas in view. Will this happen? Not as long as we have vested interests in Washington and New York that want us to be dependent on Middle East oil.

We should scale back all foreign aid. Most of it is a sham anyway, and we continue to prop up countries that hate our guts so we can show them how compassionate we are. We should cut them loose and let them go. This country is under no obligation to feed those who would cut our throats if they got the chance. Of course if they did that, who'd feed them?

And this one is a real jewel. How about eliminating the Department of Education? This useless appendage does nothing but provide lots of fat, cushy jobs for bureaucrats who spend most of their time writing rules and regulations for government schools that make about as much sense as Mother Goose stories. Somehow, education in this country managed to survive before this department came along and I am confident it would survive without it and the billions it costs us could be trimmed from the budget. Besides, everybody knows it was nothing but Jimmy Carter's payoff to the Teachers' unions for their support of his candidacy when he ran for president--so who needs it?

And then there is Obamacare, that great socialized medicine boondoggle which will cost how many billion, or is it trillion now? This program is so riddled with federal regulations that health care in this country will, in effect, be nothing more than a federal program, with the feds deciding what medicine you get and how long they will allow you to live.

How about privatizing Amtrak? What does that cost every year and did it ever show a profit? If it did, that's long in the past. One more program Karl Marx would have loved--federally run transportation!

Then to top off a really great day, how about taking whatever stimulus money remains unspent yet and just returning it to the federal budget. I'm told there is about $60 billion of it they haven't used yet. This country is not about to spend it's way back to prosperity like the Federal Reserve people tell us it will--as long as they can keep churning out those dollar bills. "Spending yourself rich" somehow doesn't quite work.

If Mr. Boehner ever got serious about cutting federal spending, here are just a few areas he could begin with. However, don't hold your breath waiting for it to happen. I'm not.

For a sample copy of our quarterly newsletter, The Copperhead Chronicle, write to The Copperhead Chronicle, P O Box 55 Sterlington, Louisiana 71280 to request one. The subscription price for the newsletter is $10.00 per year.