Sunday, October 28, 2012

Will "Frankenstorm" Postpone the Election?

by Al Benson Jr.

Well, some watched the presidential debates, at least as much of them as they could stomach. Some of us watched portions of them via the Internet.

I am no big fan of Mitt Romney. I think history shows that the Republicans are just as much of a problem for the country as the Democrats. That the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission control both major parties is common knowledge to those who follow the political scene, even to those who won't admit such. So you will get their boy no matter who wins this beauty contest we still call a presidential election.

What I think is more important for people to concentrate on is local, county, parish and state elections. Informed people can still have an impact on those.

Anyway, after the debates were over and much of the "news" media claimed that Obama had won the last two debates hands down, Romney started to do much better in many of the polls and he has continued on that upward trend slowly but surely.

Now a little more than a week before the election a good portion of the country is about to be threatened by "Frankenstorm"--the "mother" of all bad weather systems in the US. We have a hurricane that is supposed to ravage the East Coast from the Carolinas up to Maine, a blue norther coming down out of Canada that has dropped temperatures by 30 degrees even in the deep South, and more rain coming up from the Southwest--and all of these weather systems are supposed to collide with one another for weather fun and games.

All of a sudden the news about Romney passing Obama in the polls has disappeared from the front pages of what passes for newspapers, to be replaced with pictures of hurricane-force winds pounding against some old building at the end of a wharf on the East Coast.

What happens if this storm or combination of storms hits just before the election and power is lost in several states, not to be returned for weeks? Will the election be postponed by an announcement from Obama on the nightly "news" broadcast telling us the election will resume when everything gets back to normal, whenever that is?

It all gives Obama such a golden opportunity to look "presidential" while he is informing us that there can be no election for the foreseeable future--however long that might be. Will his "presidential" performance during this storm change any of the poll numbers from what they would otherwise have been?

I listened to an interview on recently in which the interviewer noted that the US government has been able to influence weather patterns since sometime in the late 1960s.

I can't say that is what is going on here, but it does make you wonder just what is going on. But, then, after all, if you can't trust your government...???

Sunday, October 14, 2012

Hate Group On The Left--The Southern Poverty Law Center

By Al Benson Jr.

The Southern Poverty Law Center, located in Montgomery, Alabama, is an organization well known to most of those in the Southern and Confederate Movements—and not viewed with fondness. This is the organization that, over ten years ago, published a list of Confederate “hate groups” that included the United Daughters of the Confederacy and the Sons of Confederate Veterans among others. None of the groups they listed could have been considered hate groups to anyone acquainted with reality. However reality is not something that concerns the SPLC.

Their agenda is to demonize almost anyone to the right of Hugo Chavez, a chore they work at with gleeful abandon. When it comes to Confederate or Southern historical or heritage groups they are all hate groups as far as the SPLC is concerned.

Not only does the SPLC seek to stigmatize Southern Heritage folks, they go after Tea Party people as well and they even stick up for segments of the United Nations agenda.

James Simpson, freelance journalist and former White House budget analyst wrote an article on in which he said: “The SPLC author called Agenda 21 an ‘environmental protection’ initiative, when anyone who has actually studied the document—I have—immediately recognizes it as a rationalization for socializing every aspect of our lives. Not merely redistributing income, which it calls for with a ‘global tax’ but redistributing populations within borders, across borders and even across continents. Sound familiar? Welcome to the open borders crowd and George Soros’ ‘Open Society.’”

Mr. Simpson has realized that the political and theological left often has a problem in promoting indefensible and unpopular agendas that promote socialism and so they are forced to come up with terminology that seeks to make something horrendous sound warm and fuzzy—and this fools lots of people. Thankfully it does not fool all of them and some of those that are not fooled do speak out.

Regarding Agenda 21 Mr. Simpson has further observed: “The U.N.’s primary vehicle for imposing Agenda 21 on local communities is the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI). National awareness of this malevolent organization has now resulted in a percent decline of their membership! About 85 local governments followed the commissioners’ example and revoked their memberships. State governments are now beginning to enact laws against Agenda 21. …We need to recognize that the SPLC does not merely represent an organized example of leftist lunacy. It is a dangerous organization, whose goal is to isolate its enemies and make them politically radioactive. They achieve this through calculated, disingenuous and hate-filled propaganda.”

Simpson has also told us that the SPLC has become a sort of “consultant” not only to the FBI but also to the Department of Homeland Security. What a convenient way to polarize their enemies and make them look evil not only to the federal government but to the public at large. I don’t know how many “news” articles I’ve seen in the past few years that call this or that organization a “hate group” and they cite the SPLC as their source. Years ago those in the Southern Movement stated quite plainly and truthfully that those who use the SPLC as source for their information about “hate groups” are just not credible and should not be taken seriously. I agree.

One piece of revelatory information was passed along by Mr. Simpson in his article when he said: “On May Day this year a bombing attempt by the Occupy Cleveland activists was thwarted. Afterward, a reporter for “National Review” asked the SPLC if it planned to put Occupy Wall Street on its ‘hate group’ list? SPLC’s stunning answer: ‘We’re not really set up to cover the extreme Left.’” In other words, their agenda is to make those on the Right look bad or look like hate-mongers but they don’t really plan to do anything in regard to leftist groups which may be genuine hate groups.

In other words, all their agenda covers is making groups on the right look bad. They have no interest in exposing leftist groups. Why? Because they are over on the far left themselves and they dare not expose any of their “comrades” they have been instructed to leave alone.

Simpson has also noted that: “The SPLC, a ‘non-profit’ organization, has a one quarter billion dollar endowment, and socks away many millions every year in donations and investment returns much of which is kept in offshore banks. Why? The SPLC is an institutionalized, heavily funded genuine hate group that focuses not on other hate grups but on groups it hates.

As far as Agenda 21 goes, I would expect the SPLC to support and endorse its “initiatives” as the United Nations is a “one world organization” with decided socialist goals. An article published on March 16, 2012 on has observed: “While actual groups do exist that are quite obviously built around hatred or intolerance of other sectors of the population, it is highly doubtful that the government or law enforcement needs the assistance of SPLC to identify them. As SPLC has acquired its massive wealth through selling their own brand of hatred for profit, doubtless they should top the list of possible suspects.”

The next time you see an article about some “right-wing hate group” and the author cites the SPLC as his source, write to the publication he works for and tell them that this group is not a credible sources and encourage the author of the article to get out and do some real homework on his subject instead of buying the tales of leftist prevaricators.

Monday, October 01, 2012


by Al Benson Jr.

Recently I did an interview on the Spingola Speaks radio show (9/24/12) dealing with the book "Lincoln's Marxists" written by Walter D. Kennedy and myself. You should be able to find this by doing a Google search and you can then listen to the podcast of the show, which was two hours long.

Interviews are interesting, yet sometimes daunting, because you never quite know what you will be asked and someone can always come up with a question that you know almost nothing about even on a subject you have researched. No one can pick up everything to do with a subject even researching it.

I have done a few radio interviews over the years and had a handful of speaking engagements at Southern Heritage events. A polished speaker I am not, so folks don't get a slick, glitzy presentation out of me but they do get facts which I hope they might be able to use and to pass on to others and that's the real reason for doing these things. Our book "Lincoln's Marxists" (Pelican Publishing, Gretna, Louisiana) contains lots of information the history books leave out about the socialist and communist involvement in the War of Northern Aggression, on the Union side.

I did a similar interview about our book about four years ago which, surprisingly, is still on the Internet at

Needless to say, not everyone agrees with our presentation of facts about socialist involvement in the War. The politically correct folks hate this kind of book and they are quick to denounce it or to write book reviews that trash it. I have been told that even a bad book review is better than no book review because some who read the review just may want to check out the book to see why the reviewer thought it was so terrible.

I can recall, years ago, when I went to movies that I would always read the movie reviews in the paper and if the reviewers really panned some movie I would think it must might be worth seeing. I usually enjoyed what the reviewers hated.