Monopoly Capitalists & Communists Are Second Cousins

By Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

The prevailing (and partly false) theory is that capitalism and communism are totally adverse one to another and that capitalists will always be opposed to communists and vice versa.

In most cases you will find that most free enterprise capitalists are opposed to communism and leftism in general. However, monopoly capitalists are a different animal and their worldview is much closer to that of communism than it is to true free enterprise. Your “history” books don’t much deal with this because you are not supposed to be aware of it and many of your teachers and professors will take great pains to make sure you do not become aware of it. It’s what they get paid for.

I don’t know if you can still get this book or not—the copy I have was printed  in 1974. It is by Antony C. Sutton (now deceased) who was a research fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University from  1968-73. The book is Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution. 

Sutton noted, on page 17, that:”Consequently, one barrier to mature understanding of recent history  is the notion that all capitalists are the bitter and unswerving enemies of all Marxists and socialists. This erroneous idea originated with Karl Marx and was undoubtedly useful to his purposes. In fact, the idea is nonsense. There has been a continuing, albeit  concealed,  alliance between  international political capitalists and international revolutionary socialists—to their mutual benefit. This alliance has gone unobserved largely because historians—with a few notable exceptions—have an unconscious Marxian bias and are thus locked into the impossibility of any such alliance existing.  The open-minded reader should bear two clues in mind: monopoly capitalists are the bitter enemies of laissez-faire entrepreneurs; and, given the weakness of socialist central planning, the totalitarian socialist state is a perfect captive market for monopoly capitalists., if an alliance can be made with the socialist powerbrokers.”

Quoted by Sutton is oil magnate E. H. Doheny, in 1919, where he talks about what went on at college campuses, and mind you, this was in 1919, not during the Viet Nam War.

Doheny said, in part, “…you will see that a majority of the college professors in the United States are teaching socialism and Bolshevism…The worst Bolshevists in the United States are not only college professors, of whom President Wilson is one,  but capitalists and the wives of capitalists and neither seem to know what they are talking about.

Sutton sums all this up on page 19 where he says: “Our story postulates a partnership  between international monopoly capitalism and international revolutionary socialism for their mutual benefit. And on page 21 Sutton gives us a key quote from Leon Trotsky where Trotsky says, in 1938: “You will have a revolution, a terrible revolution. What course it takes will depend much on what Mr. Rockefeller tells Mr. Hague to do. Mr. Rockefeller is a symbol of the American Ruling class and Mr. Hague is a symbol of its political tools.” Sounds just like today, doesn’t it? You will discover, as you go along, that certain capitalists in this country continually fund and finance Leftist causes.

In his book The Naked Capitalist  W. Cleon Skousen noted a comment made by Dr. Bella Dodd, a former member of the National Committee of the U. S. Communist Party where Dodd said: “I think the Communist conspiracy is merely a branch of a much bigger conspiracy.” Dodd, as a Communist, had wondered where her orders came from. After World War 2 she had contacts that, basically, gave her marching orders. And Skousen noted that: “What  puzzled Dr. Dodd was the fact that not one of these three contacts was a Russian. Nor were any of them Communists. In fact, all three were extremely wealthy American capitalists!” Skousen’s book was privately printed in 1970. See if you can find it on Amazon. Skousen goes into an organization called The Council on Foreign Relations. Some of you have no doubt heard of this. Others may not have. You need to be aware of this group because they affect how this country is governed and who gets appointed or chosen to  specific positions that will, whether you believe it or not, will affect all of our lives.

Another one you should check out, and I believe it has been posted  on the internet, is  The Rockefeller File by Gary Allen. If you want to know how the Deep State operated in the late 1970s you need to read this one. Some things haven’t changed much.

More as the Lord allows, but this will give you a start. Check out The Rockefeller File and an earlier one by Gary Allen, None Dare Call It Conspiracy  on the internet. That way you can read them for nothing and begin to learn about what you have been taught to believe doesn’t exist. It does exist and you need to wake  up to it, for your childrens’ sake.

Also of interest---Check out the latest article on https://revisedhistory.wordpress.com--Karl Marx--Deadbeat Daddy.  It noted that Marx was so busy fomenting revolution he couldn't even be bothered trying to support his own family.

A "Civil War" To Commemorate 100 Years Of Communism?

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

October of 2017 is now upon us, with a rather fiery beginning in Las Vegas, Nevada, which we will comment on below. This is a very special time for Communists around the world. It is the 100th anniversary of the October Revolution. It is often referred to as Red October. This was the Bolshevik Revolution led by Lenin. Wikipedia says it was "...instrumental in the large Russian Revolution of 1917. It took place with an armed insurrection in Petrograd on the 25th of October (7 November, New Style)  1917." I don't want to go into the whole bloody scenario except to note that the Communists have always been very "date conscious" when it came to big anniversaries such as this. If you all remember, we were treated to the first official celebration of Earth Day on the 100th anniversary of Lenin's birth. This was hardly a coincidence!

So what will we have for the 100th anniversary of the Bolshevik Revolution? Las Vegas just may be a sneak preview.

How about Antifa giving us a "civil war" in the United States?

If you follow some of this stuff like I do, you have been getting all manner of reports about the Las Vegas shooting this morning. The shooter(s) opened fire on concert goers at a Country Music concert--folks who are probably pretty much traditional Americans, and therefore, automatically enemies to Antifa and the Communists both.

It was originally reported by the mainstream media that the shooter had committed suicide. I've seen other reports that say an FBI rescue team killed him after he opened fire on them. I have also seen sketchy reports of a possible second shooter. I'd be willing to bet that if there was one that will be the last you hear about him. There was one fairly good article on www.independent.co.uk  ISIS has also claimed responsibility for the shooting and it has also been claimed that the shooter "converted to Islam several months ago" and therefore, was "a soldier of the Islamic State." We will just have to keep our eye on this and be discerning enough to separate the wheat from the chaff, because with the mainstream media out there, you are guaranteed to get lots and lots of chaff--along with the calls for more gun control.

Doug Hagmann put out some commentary about a possible civil war in his Northeast Intelligence Network on August 31, 2017. He mentioned his first contact with a DHS "whistleblower"  on May 25th, 2012. It was documented on his site and others as well, including the Canada Free Press. Mr. Hagmann said: "On that occasion, this source stated that 'DHS is actively preparing for massive social unrest inside the United States. He then corrected himself, stating that a civil war is the more appropriate term. Certain elements of the government are not only expecting and preparing for it, they are actually facilitating it. That was several months before the re-election of Barack Hussein Obama, the man of questionable origins, dubious bona fides and an inherent, visceral hatred for everything that made America a once-great nation.Obama had to win re-election to complete his task of destroying our Representative Republic.  He was handily re-elected without much viable opposition, giving him additional time to complete his duties as the front man for his Globalist puppet masters." Do you begin to see now why they could not afford to let Ron Paul win in 2012? He noted that "plans, tactics and timetables change, but the objectives of the Globalists don't."

What threw the Globalist plot out of whack in 2016 was the election of Donald Trump. Hillary was supposed to win--and complete what Obama had started--the proverbial stake through the heart--which means that even the One World Government crowd isn't always able to get it right and so they have to go back and retrench. They have done that with their ongoing attacks on Trump.

But there is a lesson there for us--the Globalists are not God--although they would like to be. Ultimately God calls the shots, not them. That's not to say they will quit in their quest for god-hood. If plan A doesn't work out they just move on to plan B.

Mr. Hagmann has observed: "Obama's 'fundamental transformation' although momentarily interrupted by the victory of Donald Trump,  will be facilitated by an armed resistance aided by holdovers inside government loyal to Obama, Clinton and the Globalist cause." Do you begin to see now why Obama had to come back and live in Washington, two miles from the White House, after his lengthy "vacation?" The Obama holdovers in government plan on hanging around as long as possible and it is beginning to look more and more like Jeff Sessions has no intention or plans for getting rid of them? I wonder why? I won't venture an opinion here, but I've got one.

So, a couple more questions: Will Antifa begin a "civil war" in this country, possibly sometime in October, to celebrate the 100th anniversary of the Bolshevik Revolution? Have they already begun it in Las Vegas? Why would they do this? How about as a "response" to some kind of false flag attack, supposedly committed by "right-wing groups?" This could well be the rationale they present to the world, as they reach for "victim status" to justify what they are going to do.

This is nothing more than the next installment of the same old "pressure from above and pressure from below" scam that has been used on us so often in the past. Doug Hagmann has thought some of this might start around the middle of October, but in light of Las Vegas you have to wonder if Antifa and the Communists were just too impatient to wait that long. Keep your eyes open--and your powder dry. You are going to see lots more of Red October!

Is Obama's Last Chore To Start A War With Russia?

by Al Benson Jr.

A friend called me tonight after watching the TV "news" and told me that Comrade Obama was imposing more sanctions on Russia to their alleged plot to influence the US elections. Knowing Obama, such an action comes as no real surprise.

Having watched his actions in the past month I am convinced that he is in the process of trying to throw a monkey wrench into whatever gears of normal government may still remain in Washington. He wants, as do his bosses in the Ruling Establishment, to hand Trump the proverbial "hell in a hand basket" when he takes office. And part of that hell may be starting a war with the Russians. After all, it's what Hillary wanted to do and now that she seems to have been put aside, at least temporarily, Obama has got to do the whole chore on his own. Of course he will have plenty of guidance in the effort from those above him. A war with Russia that he could pass along to Trump would be his last great coup--sort of a "I'll spit in your eye" kind of departure. Somewhat akin to "dancing on your grave!"

He has ordered that thirty five Russian diplomats be ejected from this country and he has, according to reports, closed down two Russian compounds, one in New York and one in Maryland, supposedly in response to "Russian harassment of American diplomats in Moscow." Now I don't know if American diplomats in Moscow have been harassed or not, If so it would not be the first time.

Now I'm not in love with the Russian government, and Putin is an ex-KGB personality and I have never believed that the KGB just disappeared after the Berlin Wall came down as so many naive souls have stated. True, the name was changed but the apparatus to operate it remained. However, as much as I dislike Putin, I believe the US Establishment is using him as an excuse to attack the credibility of a new Trump administration by planting the rumors that all the "fake news" the "alt-right" supposedly planted out there has been coming from Russia. It's interesting that all those who now have a big problem with Russian seemed to have no problem with it when it was officially a part of the Soviet Union. Anti-Communists they were not and they still aren't.

According to an article from Business Insider by Pamela Engel: "The CIA has said the Russians had been working toward a specific goal when they hacked into the inboxes of Democratic National Committee staffers and Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman, John Podesta: 'to help get (Donald) Trump elected'  president."

At first the FBI and the NSA, if I recall correctly, both disagreed with the CIA that the Russians had had anything to do with all the hacking that went on. They continued in their disagreement with the CIA until, at one point one day, we were treated to a media story about how, suddenly, the FBI and the NSA seemed to have a prophetic revelation and all of a sudden they totally agreed with the CIA that the Russians had been doing all this stuff. Both agencies suddenly caved in, I think per instruction from someone above them, and admitted that it was all the Russians' fault and that, without the Russians, somehow, Trump would not have made it to the White House and we would have been blessed with the autocratic rule of Queen Hillary instead. And don't think that, even at this late date, if they could find a way to pull such a stunt off they wouldn't do it in a New York heartbeat!

But if they can't accomplish that, then the least Obama can do is to start a war with the Russians before he leaves office and hand Trump a fait accompli when he gets sworn in. After all, if you had the bosses that Obama has, wouldn't you do it--or else???

There is an article on LewRockwell.com for December 30th by Daisy Luther dealing with this same situation that is worth reading.

test

See if you can get into http://revisedhistory.wordpress.com

I asked people to try to get into my blog because on the morning of November 3rd I had tried to open it via Firefox and it would not open. When I went to check, I found out that, on Firefox, my blog was not even listed anymore. Guess I must have offended someone somehow. Didn't think my material was THAT controversial!

When I went to Google and put up the same search pages I found that my blog was still listed on Google's search pages, so if you want to check out my articles you may have to get into them by some other source than Firefox.

In following the odd trends in the present election cycle I note that the Clinton Camp has indulged in all manner of claims against both Trump and Wikileaks, claiming that both are being heavily influenced by Putin and the Russians. Now I am no fan of Putin's by any stretch of the imagination, but let's don't start blaming him for things he probably had no hand in.

And speaking of Hillary's loathing for Putin, didn't she have some kind of deal with him awhile back whereby they managed to sell Putin 20% of the Uranium in this country? Wonder if any of that Uranium was on land that was anyplace close to the Bundy Ranch in Nevada?

Watched a video a couple nights ago that had been on stevepiecznik.com in which Mr. Piecznik noted that the material that came from Wikileaks was not passed to them by the Russians but, in reality, came from somewhere in the intelligence community, what Mr. Piecznik referred to as "deep state officials." Mr. Piecznik is a former assistant secretary of state and has been around the intelligence community for decades.

He warned of a "Clinton coup' etat" in which the Clintons had "co-opted" the FBI, CIA, and other groups but he said that there were those in these groups that were sincere patriots and they had initiated a counter-coup, part of which was the turning over to Julian Assange all these Clinton emails that he has been putting out there. The FBI's reopening of the Clinton email situation is part of this. So it will be interesting to see how all of this turns out. Whatever one may think of Trump, electing his opposite number in the Democratic Establishment is unthinkable for the future of this country. If such happens, we will, in fact, end up having no country at all. Trump seems to understand this and, for good reason, is opposed to Hillary's "open borders" approach to dismantling the country in favor of merging it into some kind of continental mega-state.

So stay alert to all this--and pray that the Lord will throw a monkey wrench into the gears of the One World Government boys' plans for us--and I mean pray seriously about this. 

Welcome to (almost) "Free Mississippi"

by Al Benson Jr.

Welcome to (almost, but not quite) free Mississippi, where your state flag is not welcome on college campuses and where you can be threatened with arrest if you dare to carry it on campus. The folks that run many of these colleges and universities, not only in Mississippi but in other parts of the country as well are cultural Marxists, which means, in plain language that they are often the "nice" Marxists. They won't cut your throat but they will try to steal your kids' heritage from them. And if they happen to work at a state college then you are paying them to do this with your tax money. Comforting thought isn't it?

So the state flag is no longer welcome at Ole Miss and other places in Mississippi as well. But the people that run many of these centers of "education" would be more than willing to have Communist flags on campus, or flags representing the black liberation movement or the transgender movement. This, they believe, would demonstrate their penchant for "diversity" or multi-culturalism or whatever they are calling their particular brand of prejudice nowadays. I'm sure that when folks start to catch on they will change the names again.

I remember, years ago now, a school I knew about on the East Coast (the original Left Coast) brought in an identified Communist to teach the kids committed to their charge how to do "community organizing." When a local pastor called them on that they told him "We like to expose our students to all different viewpoints." Of course having someone from the John Birch Society in to lecture the students would never, and I mean never, have occurred to them. They wanted to be diverse but not THAT diverse!

Same situation in Mississippi. The educational elders in many of these schools welcome diversity, as long as it is a diversity from the left. The right is not worth mentioning--and they don't, anymore than they are forced to except to scream about how those on the right are all "racist, sexist, homophobes, Islamaphobes, and "deplorables." Sound familiar? The erstwhile candidate that is running (maybe not as fast as she used to) on the Democratic ticket could have taken her speech about us deplorables from most any college president in the country. But it gives you a really good view of what these folks thinks of us ordinary folks, and it ain't much, but then you already knew that.

So the kids at the University of Mississippi are free to go to the football games as long as they don't take their state flag in with them or as long as they don't bring in a sign requesting that the band play Dixie. The kids could walk in with almost anything else and it wouldn't be nearly as reprehensible as these two items. You have to know that your world has really been turned upside down when your state flag is banned on campus. The Communist Hammer & Sickle would be welcomed but the Mississippi state flag is not. If you are paying attention at all this has to tell you something, and if you're not paying attention then maybe you should be.

Lots of kids showed up with Mississippi state flags for last Saturday's football game at the University of Mississippi--and had them confiscated by campus police. According to an article on http://dailycaller.com "Students who had their flags taken away by police--along with signs declaring 'Let The Band Play Dixie'--said they were threatened with arrest if they did not give them up." So at the University of Mississippi you can be arrested for displaying your state flag. I tell you, folks, that's real progress, a sign of true "liberty" but for who? Certainly not for ordinary Mississippians. How long will it be before flying your state flag on your own property will be forbidden? Don't laugh--it's not as far fetched as it sounds. And if the folks in Mississippi don't stand up and resist this damn-foolishness it may well come to that.

I noted one positive event at the university's football game last week--a whole batch of students got together and unfurled a 20' by 30' Mississippi state flag in the student section. Someone sent me a photo of it on Facebook and it had to have caught someone's attention as big as it was, but it also showed that those students who held it up there for everyone to see must still have had some pride in and thankfulness for their state flag and its heritage. I don't know if the police eventually confiscated this one or if someone managed to sneak it out wrapped in their jacket or not but it was good to see the picture. It showed that, at some level, not quite all the students had bought into this cultural Marxism that is so cloyingly present on so many campuses, even in the South. With the Lord's help and guidance there may yet be hope, but the battle is far from over and far from won. And those who want to preserve their heritage, faith, and culture need to learn to "keep the skeer on" because you can bet our adversaries plan on doing that.

Insurance For Hillary To Win (even if she doesn't)

by Al Benson Jr.

To anyone with the ability to think it has to be obvious that the Ruling CFR/Trilateral Establishment is concerned over the possibility that Trump might really win this next presidential election and so they are busy putting into place all the contingencies possible to make sure that will not happen (even if he wins). If fact the federal scenario might well read "even if he wins he loses."

I noted yesterday an article from The Washington Examiner http://www.washingtonexaminer.com that told us that the Dept. of Homeland Security is eying a "special declaration to take charge of the elections."
Homeland Security chief Jeh Johnson smirked as he said: "There's a vital interest in our election process, so I do think we need to consider whether it should be considered by my department and others critical infrastructure." Critical for who--Hillary?

I mean, let's don't kid ourselves, do we really think, in light of all the federal foolishness regarding Hillary's emails, the Clinton Foundation and all the rest, that a Dept. of Homeland Security that is stuffed full of Obama appointees is going to labor to give us an honest, unbiased election result? If we honestly think that we are beyond gullible--and probably beyond any reasonable help. The FBI couldn't find it in their hearts to indict Hillary despite all the evidence, the leaks and all the rest--and we expect an "unbiased" election return from Homeland Security??? C'mon folks, get real! I fear that all we will get from these people is an agenda to ensure that Hillary's coronation will take place officially no matter who gets how many votes. If you wonder why I take such a negative view of all this, try over 150 years of government lies to the public that I know about, and others know even more than me.

And to make sure they are able to continue to lie to us, with no competition from any truthful source, they plan to sign away control of the Internet at the end of this month. And, according to some arcane law, they have to assign it to some "governing body" which will most likely be the United Nations or some derivitive thereof. Notice all this takes place before the election so that whatever source feeds us our election returns will be under the control of some international body. Once the Internet is gone where do you go for independent and alternative news? Most likely you don't, and we will be right back where we were before the Internet, looking to the prostitute press controlled by the Establishment to get whatever news they feel is in our (and their) "best interests."

So what happens to all those web sites and blog spots that have proliferated in recent years that tell us all the stuff that the government would rather we be ignorant of? Do you need to ask? Down the "memory hole" folks, because you don't need to know this stuff. And the Establishment is going to make darned sure you don't.

Evolution and Spiritualism--Darwin and Wallace

by Al Benson Jr.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

"The Fix Is In"

by Al Benson Jr.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Trump Doesn't Need Gingrich--He might as well have Hillary!

by Al Benson Jr.

Donald Trump has become hugely popular with ordinary folks because he has been saying things that they know need to be said and because he has proposed solutions to problems that they realize need solutions other than those given by the Ruling Establishment. Trump has positioned himself as an anti-Establishment candidate and the voting public is thoroughly fed up with the "business as usual" attitude of the Republican/Democratic Establishment because they realize those people are out to stiff them. In the final analysis what's the real difference between Hillary, Bernie, Jeb or Marco, or even Cruz for that matter?
The only difference is the rhetoric--they say different things but DO the same things!

It looked like Trump might actually be a breath of fresh air and try to do something other than pursue the Ruling Establishment's agenda. I say "looked like" because it now appears, after talking up a big anti-Establishment crusade, he is now about to pick one of the Establishment's major players as his vice-president--Newt Gingrich. For those folks desiring real change in the direction of government this is bad news.

A few years back I did a couple articles about Newt Gingrich  for blog spots that are no longer on the Internet and so they are not readily available. However there is a very relevant article presently on the Internet on http://newswithviews.com  written by Kelleigh Nelson on May 11th of this year. Mrs. Nelson presents several important facts about Gingrich that people should be aware of--and that Donald Trump should be aware of if he isn't. I will pass along a few of Mrs. Nelson's concerns here.

She noted that, in 1968 Gingrich campaigned for Nelson Rockefeller.  She also observed that: "In 1990, he became a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. If you've never read Richard N. Gardner's April 1974 article in CFR's World Affairs, Gardner called for an end run around national sovereignty eroding it piece by piece. The CFR was founded in 1921 for world government and eliminating national independence. Henry Kissinger is also a CFR member and actually schooled Newt, and both claim they're conservatives..." So it seems that Kissinger tutored Mr. Gingrich and anyone who knows anything about anything knows that Kissinger is no more a conservative than was Mao Tse Tung! The CFR is diametrically  opposed to what Mr. Trump says he stands for--America first.

While he was in the Senate Gingrich voted for the creation of the Department of Education and Mrs. Nelson also observed that "William Z. Foster called for a federal Department of Education in his book Towards Soviet America..." And Gingrich also voted to designate 68 million acres as Federal protected wilderness. Mrs. Nelson also noted that ":Federal land grabs today are huge percentages of the 13 western states that are not federally owned." If Mr. Trump really believes in property rights as he claims then this should be a major concern to him. Gingrich voted for $1.2 billion for UN "peacekeeping." That's a direct slap in the face to anyone advocating national sovereignty. And he wanted Most Favored Nation status for Red China and he was strongly pro-amnestly--right along with Jeb Bush. These are things Mr. Trump has claimed to be opposed to, yet here he is looking at a man for vice-president who is in favor of all the things Trump says he wants to straighten out.

I can't go into everything in Mrs. Nelson's article but suffice it to say that she points out key areas where Gingrich, over the years, has taken the exact opposite position from the one Trump advocates. So what goes on here??? Does Trump really not know where Gingrich is coming from on all these issues? If that's the case then Mr. Trump needs a fast education before he picks a running mate. If that's not the case, then does the public have a right, in view of all that has gone on, to question whether they are being lied to yet one more time?

If Mr. Trump is really sincere in his positions, and up to now I felt he was, and yet he picks Gingrich as his running mate, then I have one more question. If the Bilderbergers who have ordained that Hillary should be the next president decide, for some reason at this late date, to throw her under the bus and Trump ends up getting elected, then what happens if down the road a few months, something "happens" to Trump so that Gingrich ends up being president?

Why, folks, if that happens, then we are back to Square One and once again it will be "business as usual in Sodom on the Potomac" as the Ruling Elite tighten their control. They will get richer and more powerful and us ordinary folks will continue to get stiffed and who knows where it will all end? Another French Revolution? At some point the public will revolt and there will be a bloody mess. I think the Lord's people need to pray for guidance to know what they will need to do when it all hits the fan because it's not a questions of whether it will, but only a question of when.

Now--Culturally Marxist Currency!

by Al Benson Jr.

Right after he was awarded the presidency of this country Obama said that he was going to "fundamentally transform" the United States. People could only guess what he meant by that, but those that knew anything of Obama's real background had deep suspicions that whatever he was going to do, it wasn't going to be good. Their suspicions have been more than justified. His transformation agenda (the agenda of his handlers) has been at work transforming the culture of this country. In fact, you could say that American culture has been emotionally and physically assaulted under "his" regime.

Now he and his handlers will further assault the culture by changing the design of the country's currency. You all have read by now about the new design of the twenty dollar bill and other bills that will be undergoing the Obamaite "transformation." The new currency designs to be foisted off on the public in the near future are living proof that the cultural Marxists will literally push their agenda in every area of our lives in an attempt to convert the sleeping public into accepting their pernicious theology.

A main "cornerstone"  of their theology is an abolitionism morphing into a "civil rights" movement. And it's all part of Karl Marx's "reconstruction of a social world" that Donnie Kennedy and I took note of in our book Lincoln's Marxists. 

Our august Secretary of the Treasury has dutifully informed us that the picture of Andy Jackson on our twenty dollar fiat currency bills will soon be replaced with a simply glowing portrait of Harriet Tubman, one of the movers and shakers in the "underground railway" before the War of Northern Aggression.

The Underground Railway, we have been told, was a system of "safe houses" from places in the South leading all the way up through the Northern states and into Canada. Supposedly friendly Southern abolitionists helped the escaping slaves to go north where a friendly, virtuous Northern population awaited their arrival with open arms. They teach some of this in many of the country's public school "history" texts.

Suffice it to say that "it ain't quite so." Writer Michael B. Chesson is a professor of history at the University of Massachusetts, Boston, and he specializes  in the history of the American "Civil War." He wrote an authoritative article for The Textbook League which appeared in their newsletter, Volume 12, Number One. Check out http://www.textbookleague.org  Professor Chesson noted several history books that promote this line about the Underground Railway and he noted the inaccuracies in all this regarding Harriet Tubman.

Suffice it to say there are culture-changing reasons why Ms Tubman is about to replace Andy Jackson on the twenty. Andy Jackson is not politically correct (culturally Marxist) and Ms. Tubman is. But they are going to keep Alexander Hamilton on the ten dollar bill. He is politically correct as the promoter of the first national bank, so the feds don't really want to remove him.

But even for that, they plan on making some changes to the ten spot, and to the five dollar bill as well, although I don't expect they will remove from the five dollar bill the portrait of the president who was a favorite of the Marxists and socialists.

The Treasury Secretary, Jack Lew, has said, in part: "The new $10 bill will honor the story and the heroes of the women's suffrage movement against the backdrop of the Treasury Building...The new $10 design will depict that historic march and honor Lucretia Mott, Sojourner Truth, Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, and Alice Paul for their contributions to the suffrage movement.?

It's interesting that Mr. Lew neglected to mention the connections of Susan B. Anthony, Lucretia Mott and Elizabeth Cady Stanton with the Spiritualist Movement during the latter part of the nineteenth century. If you can find a copy of the book Radical Spirits  by Ann Braude that will give you some insight into the Spiritualist Movement and its connections with the "women's rights" movement. The early feminist movement was riddled with Spiritualism. This is something else the "history" books have mostly forgotten to mention.

After neglecting to mention all that, Mr. Lew moved on to inform us that the new five dollar bill, in addition to keeping the portrait of the Marxist's favorite president, "will depict the historic events that have occurred at the Lincoln Memorial." Lew noted that, in 1963, Martin Luther King Jr. gave us his "I have a dream" speech at the Lincoln Memorial. Lew noted that, on the back of the five dollar bill, they will start featuring leaders of the civil rights movement. That should be interesting. I wonder which ones they will pick--they can't go too far in hardly any direction without bumping into someone with Communist connections, not that this would bother them, as long as the public at large can be kept in total ignorance about it. With our current public education system that should be no problem.

So we have finally gotten to the point where all the culturally Marxist leftist aberrations will now be commemorated as healthy and normal on our currency. Former history will be erased  and some of the prize agendas of the cultural Marxist Movement will be enshrined on the currency, complete with anti-counterfeit strips. What more could you ask for?

I just wonder what they will end up doing with the one dollar bill. After all, George Washington WAS a slave owner. Maybe, they can find some way to get someone like Pol Pot, the great Cambodian "liberator" onto the one dollar bill. Undoubtedly he would be quite acceptable to the cultural Marxist crowd and they could then get rid of that picture of that nasty old Southern slave owner. After all, we have had presidential candidates whose citizenship in this country has not been beyond question, so why not a known Communist on the one dollar bill? Our currency (notice I have not called it money) has become a major propaganda tool for the One World government crowd. Unfortunately, most people probably will not even notice. Unfortunately, their children and grandchildren will--and the knowledge won't be positive.

Aborted Babies Kept Alive So Organs Could Be Harvested

by Al Benson Jr.

An article on www.washingtontimes.com  for August 19th carried a headline that stated: Planned Parenthood kept aborted babies alive to harvest organs, ex-technician says. The article was written by Cheryl Wetzstein. In the article she stated: "In an undercover video released Wednesday, a former technician for a tissue-harvesting company details how an aborted baby was kept alive so that its heart could be harvested at a California Planned Parenthood facility, raising more legal questions about the group's practices."

The article also said: "...a former blood and tissue procurement technician for the biotech startup StemExpress also said she was asked to harvest an intact brain from the late-term, male fetus whose heart was still beating after the abortion."

So this is what goes on in this country under the fabled euphemism of providing for "women's health." The people doing this stuff are among those who cry out for "compassion" for poor women and for other "causes" most of which, if you do some homework, seem to have originated on the left.

I grew up hearing about all the atrocities Hitler committed in Germany when the Nazis were in power. You didn't hear much about Communist atrocities which were numerically worse than anything Hitler did because it wasn't, and isn't politically correct to discuss them. After all, we are all supposed to believe that the Communists and other assorted Leftists are really compassionate and loving people whose only problem is that they have a slightly different viewpoint than we do and so we need to sit and dialogue with them. For some strange reason they don't take that same position with Hitler. Don't misunderstand me here--I have no use for either Hitler and the Nazis or the Communists. Both are variants of Leftist ideology. Both are anti-Christian.

But if we end up sanctioning what Planned Parenthood is doing to these unborn babies then we better get down on our knees and apologize to Hitler because what we are allowing in this country is every bit as bad as what he did in Nazi Germany.

It seems that, in this country, many churches are so busy ordaining sodomite bishops and ministers that they are way too busy to pay attention to what Planned Parenthood has been doing, probably for decades now. The churches in this country should be screaming to Heaven over what goes on in these abortion mills, but most of them are much too comfortable to be bothered. Now that these  videos have been released and the public is beginning to find out what Planned Parenthood is really doing, they don't have nearly as much excuse for keeping quiet.

Some churches around the country have taken a strong anti-abortion stand over the years--but what about the rest??? What about the majority? They can't claim total ignorance anymore so what will they do? That's the sixty-four dollar question.

If we can look at what Planned Parenthood is doing with these unborn babies and not admit that this is, indeed, a new level of barbarity, then maybe this country has gone past the point of no return. The evolutionists tell us that man is "progressing" that he is becoming more and more civilized. Actually, what we have today is not primitive barbarity, it is high-tech barbarity. This is the kind of thing this country needs to repent of and to stop, even if the federal government does want it to continue. And the fact that they do tells you something about the federal government. Folks, wake up and smell the coffee--if you can even bear to drink it after finding out what they are doing to these poor unborn children!