More Internet and Email Censorship???

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

Those who follow my blogs know that my stuff on both blogs has been shadow banned recently. Neither of my blogs has been popular--I guess because I don't talk about all the warm, fuzzy stuff the Leftists want talked about--rather I talk about what frauds and sham artists they all are, and that's a no-no, especially in an election season.

As I said, recently I had problems and then, all of a sudden, they ceased and everything went back to normal. I sort of concluded that my blogs (and probably those of others like me) had been put through sort of a dry run to show the Deep State media control freaks what it was possible for them to get away with regarding us. I thought they might have concluded that we were not all that big a threat numbers-wise and so they could probably ignore us.

Foolishness on my part! They're back!

From time to time on aol, when I would reply to someone's email I would get a notice that said "there was an error sending the message" and so it would not go through. I didn't mind this once in awhile, because after all, things happen, but I guess aol has decided that it worked so well they will use it to shut down any communication I have with folks that send me email.

Now, every message I try to reply to from someone gets this same error message. That means I can't reply to anyone that sends me a message on aol and I can't forward anything I receive from others on aol because anything I try to send out gets an error message tacked onto it and won't go anywhere.

In other words, anything I try to send out from aol is automatically an "error" message and, therefore, cannot be sent. It's not that aol is banning me, you understand. They wouldn't do that to me. They are just not letting me communicate with those I receive email from because all my replies are suddenly "error messages" that can't be sent.

So I am now starting to phase my email communications via aol out and my readers will henceforth be getting my messages from another provider and just think, that will save aol the trouble of having to label my outgoing mail as "error messages." It will probably make their whole day!

It's probably time I started movin' on anyway and as I am able to do that, soon I won't even be able to say to aol "I'll see you at sundown."

Where Is the Church Headed Now—And should we resist the trip?

By Al Benson Jr.

Earlier this week someone sent me an article from Relevant Magazine entitled: The Presbyterian Church Votes to Recognize Same-Sex Marriage. The headline is slightly misleading because all Presbyterians have not voted to endorse or accept same-sex (sodomite) marriage. No doubt the “progressive Presbyterians” have accepted it, but us Neanderthals in many Presbyterian churches have not, and will not, in accordance with God’s Word, accept this.

Actually the article is referring to the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) or PCUSA as most of us call it.  This denomination has been drifting leftward by degrees for decades now and so such a move was not totally unexpected. According to the Relevant article: “While the office of the General Assembly is still awaiting official tallies, it appears that a majority of the 171 presbyteries of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) have approved a change to the current description of marriage in the PC (USA)’s Constitution.”

Unfortunately, the liberal Presbyterians are not the only ones in the church that are pushing this perversion. In another article on www.relevantmagazine.com  the headline reads: Rob Bell: The Church Is ‘Moments Away’ From Accepting Gay Marriage. The article went on to say: “He (Bell) went on to say the church was risking irrelevance by holding off on an embrace of gay marriage. ‘I think the culture is already there,’ he said. ‘And the church will continue to be even more irrelevant when it quotes letters from 2,000 years ago as their best defense…’.” Look at his last statement. Do you realize what he’s saying here? He’s calling into doubt what the New Testament has to say about marriage because it doesn’t seem “relevant” to him. Where does that put him in regard to the authority of Scripture? If he can dismiss the truth of Scripture that easily because it doesn’t conform to what the world believes, I would suggest that, in the long run, maybe he is irrelevant.

In another article on www.standupfortruth.com  Rob Bell is noted as part of the Emergent Church movement, which the article describes this way: “The Emergent Church movement is a progressive Christian movement that attempts to reduce or eliminate Christian doctrine in favor of experience and feelings. Most do not believe man can know what is absolute truth, and believe God must be experienced outside of traditional biblical doctrines.” This is just another version of “if it feels good do it.” No doctrine, no absolute truth, just experience and feeling. These people are the Transcendentalists of the 21^st century. Emerson and Thoreau would have loved them! The article notes some of the leaders of this movement—among whom are Rob Bell and Rick Warren (“whom many of these leaders point to as their inspiration for the Emergent Movement.”) Does this help you to understand why Warren’s name was linked with Obama’s during the 2008 presidential farce?

It would seem that the arrogance and egotism of some of these apostates (and that’s what they are) knows no ends. In a brief article on www.beginningandend.com  the following was noted: “In a stunning sign of the growing apostasy—the rise of the false church in Christianity that no longer treats the Bible as its final authority, Reverend Oliver White of Grace Community United Church,  came on the radio show of Fox News Host Sean Hannity to proclaim that Jesus Christ was ‘wrong’  on the issue of homosexuality and gay marriage. White, speaking for Jesus Christ, said, with respect to the issue of gay marriage no longer being a sin: ‘If Jesus were alive today, I think he would be more inclined to say: you know, I didn’t know it all’…” There’s a photo of Rev. White at the top of this article holding what appears to be a big Bible—but then, with Rev. White’s attitude toward Jesus, maybe it’s really an enlarged version of The Humanist Manifesto. Here’s a man who thinks he knows more than Jesus Christ. Another 21^st century Transcendentalist! Who says Unitarianism, Transcendentalism, and all the other unholy “isms” died in the 19^th century? Some of them may have taken a little breather, but they are back, alive and well today and their practitioners are back, fooling another generation of “useful idiots” who have never read their church history anymore than they have their American history and so they continue to make grandiose pronouncement while not knowing upside down from inside out.

You have to wonder why more preachers don’t stand up and expose this stuff. Too many have been bemused into a “all I’m called to do is to preach the gospel and I don’t want to get involved in politics” stance. This absolves them, so they think, from having to do anything about the abysmal spiritual condition of the church in our day. If they don’t know anything about any of it then they can’t deal with it, and so they continue on with a truncated version of John 3:16 and never, and I mean never, get beyond that. Nothing against John 3:16—it’s foundational, but if you never get past  the foundation then the house isn’t going to get built and you’ll live in the cellar forever. That’s one problem I have with the Scofield Bible Notes. They teach Christians to stay in the cellar because that’s all they will ever be.

Another problem for the cellar dwellers is the501c3 syndrome, which says that if any church, anywhere, makes even the remotest political statement about anything, then they will lose their tax exemption. Churches today are hide-bound by this and scared stiff to say anything that might “offend” the ruling elite and cost them their exemption. An article on www.hushmoney.org noted that “Churches were only added to section 501c3 of the tax code in 1954. We can thank Senator Lyndon B. Johnson for that.  Johnson was no ally of the church.  As part of his political agenda, Johnson had it in mind to silence the church and eliminate the significant influence the church had always had on shaping ‘public policy’…For a 501c3 church to openly speak out, or organize in opposition to, anything the government declares ‘legal’ even if it is immoral (e.g. abortion, homosexuality, etc.) that church will jeopardize its tax exempt status. The 501c3 has had a ‘chilling effect’ upon the free speech rights of the church.” The article noted that LBJ was a “shrewd and cunning politician who seemed to well-appreciate how easily many of the clergy would sell out.”

Now the IRS routinely warns churches during election years not to deal with where candidates stand on any issues and so the threat is always there.

So this seems to be where the church is headed—intimidated by the IRS, scared stiff of losing their tax exemptions, inundated with false preachers who tell us that sodomy and other related sins are okay and that we wont be “relevant” unless we dump biblical teaching and embrace all the latest perversions. Thank the Lord there are some churches that don’t buy into this bovine fertilizer, but there are too many that do. The pastors that promote this rank apostasy are leading their congregations astray and there doesn’t seem, in many cases, to be enough spiritual discernment among the congregants to grasp this.

At the risk of offending the current seekers of “relevance” I would go back and advocate what the Scripture says in 2^nd Corinthians 6:14-18 to Christians in our day. If you are in a church where this kind of thing is permitted or encouraged then separate yourself from that church and find one that believes in and trusts the Holy Scriptures. Staying in apostate congregations will do nothing more than make you “two-fold more the child of hell” than you were before. I can understand wanting to help and love sinners, but accepting their perversions as normal does not help them, in fact it may well do them eternal harm.

For Real "Freedom" Let Government Regulate the Internet

by Al Benson Jr.

Now that the Republicans have taken the Senate it almost seems as if Comrade Obama is in overdrive, trying to accomplish as much of his socialist agenda as possible before the end of the year. And even though many in the Republican-controlled Congress will always be soft of socialism and collectivism he can't be sure enough will be so that his socialist schemes, which he characterizes as "legislation" will always be veto-proof.

That's why he is in such a huff to issue executive orders making millions of illegal immigrants legal before Comrade Reid vacates the senate. As leftist as some of the Republicans are, there are some things they are just not going to do for him so he's got to get them done before the Republicans take over.

There was an article on www.foxnews.com  on November 10th which stated: "We are stunned the president would abandon the longstanding, bi-partisan  policy of lightly regulating the Internet and calling for extreme" regulation, said Michael Powell, president and CEO of the National Cable and  Telecommunications Association, the primary lobbying arm of the cable industry." The head Commissar, I mean the President, wanted federal regulators to have the Internet reclassified as a public utility under Title II of the 1934 Communications Act.

Supposedly this is all about cable companies and all the rest, but let's don't kid ourselves. This is really all about federal censorship of Internet content. Although they will never admit it, that's the real name of the game. People can go to the Internet and access far more information than the government fells they should have, information that often aids them in deciding what's really going on in Washington--and the feds would rather they not have that information. Intelligent decisions are not something the feds are in favor of when it comes to us "stupid voters." They want us to be dumb and easily led sheeple so they can tell us what we should be doing and we are too dumb to question any of it.  Real "freedom" isn't the name of the game, censorship is.

Voters should have learned by now that when this administration tells you anything then you had better start considering that the exact opposite of what they told you comes pretty close to the truth. Remember all those Obamaesque fables about how "transparent" his administration would be? There wasn't much transparency in the "Fast and Furious" gunrunning situation or in the situation with the IRS "lost" emails was there? This administration has told us so little truth you could almost post it on the head of a pin, a very small pin.

And we haven't been told much of anything about Holder's "replacement" at Attorney General--something else Obama wants to get taken care of before the first of the year. Just more "transparency" folks, don't even think about it. However, there was an interesting little article on www.stage2omega.com  written by Dr. Orly Taitz on November 9th. Dr. Taitz stated: "...so I am rather certain that Loretta Lynch is an old college friend of Sharon Malone, the wife of the current AG Eric Holder. Why is this connection important? Holder will be investigated by Congress for totally lawless gun trafficking to Mexican drug cartels in Fast and Furious, IRS scandal, VA scandal, DOJ, NSA, EPA, FEC and other scandals. Most importantly, Holder covered up Obama's use of a stolen CT Social Security number of Harrison J. Bounel 042-68-4425 and Obama's use of bogus IDs. It seems that a long time friend of Holder's wife was picked up as a gate keeper to continue all the cover up by Holder and shield Holder and Obama from criminal prosecution."

If Dr. Taitz has all this down pat, then we have to ask "How's all the "transparency" working out for you?

We also have to ask that if Obama claims he needs more government regulation so the Internet can be more "free" then what's the real name of the game? You can bet the farm it ain't "freedom." You can also bet the farm that whatever justification he claims, it won't be long before the Internet is much less free and our access to information that will help us know what really goes on will be as severely restricted as this regime can make it. Real truth is the absolute last thing this regime wants the public to have access to.