Secret Police In Clergy Robes

by Al Benson Jr.

Communists in all areas of the world have long recognized the potential for spreading their lies and their agenda in churches and, through deception and propaganda, they often manage to manipulate those who should be their strongest opponents—Christians. That’s right, Christians should be the major opponents of communism and socialism, if they understood Scripture. However, since many of them don’t, they wind up being the unwitting accomplices, the “useful idiots” as it were, in the spread of socialism and communism (cultural Marxism) both in this country and in the world.

There was a saying several decades ago that: “While not many ministers become Communists, a lot of Communists become ministers.” Unfortunately, that has been the truth, both in this country, in much of Latin America, Europe, and in parts of Africa.

Years ago, back in the early 1970s, I think, the John Birch Society published an informative little booklet entitled Apostasy and the National Council of Churches. It dealt with some well-known churchmen in the National Council of Churches who were actually Communist Party members as well as others who, although not actual party members, were more than willing to work toward the Communist agenda in this country.

Back awhile ago now, someone also sent me a six-page booklet called the Air Reserve Center Training Manual. It was published in February, 1960 and contained several important items that you will hardly find in your denominational journals. On page 3 it stated: “The National Council of Churches of Christ in the U.S.A. officially sponsored the Revised Standard Version of the Bible. Of the 95 persons who served on this project, 30 have been affiliated with pro-Communist fronts, projects, and publications.” That’s basically one third of them! The quote continued: “In its own brochure, the National Council of Churches listed the names of the Revision Committee and the Advisory Board. Among these were Walter Russell Bowie of Grace Church, New York; Henry J. Cadbury of Harvard University; George Dahl of Yale University; Frederick C. Grant of Seabury-Western Theological Seminary; and Leroy Waterman of the University of Michigan. All of these men were affiliated, for example, with the National Federation for Constitutional Liberties. (NFCL). The House Committee on Un-American Activities said of the NCFL: ‘There can be no reasonable doubt about the fact that the National Federation for Constitutional Liberties…is one of the viciously subversive organizations of the Communist Party…Not only were these men affiliated with the NCFL, but many similar Communist fronts and enterprises—Walter Russell Bowie with a total of 29; Henry J. Cadbury and George Dahl, 13; Frederick C. Grant 8; and Leroy Waterman 25.”

On page 4 it was stated: “Dr. Harry F. Ward, a long-recognized leader in the National Council of Churches, was a professor of Christian Ethics at Union Theological Seminary in New York City for some 25 years, during which time he influenced thousands of theological students. Dr. Ward was identified by Louis Francis Budenz (an ex-Communist) before the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee as a member of the Communist Party…Ex-Communist Manning Johnson referred to Dr. Ward as the ‘Red Dean of the Communist Party in the religious field.’” If anyone would like to send me a dollar for mailing costs I will reproduce this six-page booklet and send it to you. Send your request to P O Box 55, Sterlington, Louisiana 71280. There’s lots of other material out there about all this. A book could be written on this if someone was willing to undertake such a project. This information gives you  just a small sample of what went on in churches in this country—and who knows what still goes on? Does anyone honestly believe that because the Berlin Wall came down years ago that Communists just automatically stopped their infiltration of American churches on the following day? Come on, folks, get real. If anything, the infiltration has expanded. Now we see evangelical churches that have obviously bought into the Marxist line and don’t realize it. I’ve recently written about some of this.

Back in the early 1970s my wife and I went with a group from the church we attended at the time to join a group led by Dr. Carl McIntire in picketing a group of Russian Orthodox “clergymen” in Chicago. Quite a few showed up to picket and I estimate there may have been around 50 of us altogether. There were enough of us in front of the building the Russian clergymen were to hold their meeting in that they snuck in the back door to avoid us. There were several Russian expatriates in our group and I never forgot one of them, who told us all, “Is no priests, is KGB.” I don’t doubt for a minute the accuracy of his comment, in light of what I have just read in Oleg Kalugin’s book, published in 1994, called The First Directorate.  Kalugin was in the KGB for over thirty years and heavily involved in espionage and intelligence work against the West, who, in some cases it seems, were barely fighting back. Kalugin’s book is still available on and I would recommend it for anyone who wants an in-depth view of the Marxist mindset in Russia.

One thing Kalugin dealt with, which should concern Americans, was the KGB penetration of the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC). On page 197 Kalugin noted: “Our long arm overseas even extended into the inner confines of the Russian Orthodox Church. Indeed, the KGB’s near-total control of the Russian Orthodox Church, both at home and abroad, is one of the most sordid and little known chapters in the history of our organization. I had only a passing knowledge of our church operations…though I later learned in depressing detail just how—through threats, bullying, and blackmail—the KGB had co-opted the church in the Soviet Union…The KGB’s notorious Fifth Directorate, in charge of ideology and dissidents, had a stranglehold over the church inside the Soviet Union, and also had recruited scores of priests in Russian eimgre communities throughout the world. The Russian Orthodox Church in America was split, but the faction that remained loyal to Moscow was riddled with KGB agents…When I ran for a seat in the Soviet parliament in 1990, I once again ran smack into the church and its KGB-controlled leadership. During campaigning in my district, in the Southern Russian region of Krasnodar, the local bishop spoke publicly and denounced me as a traitor. I couldn’t sit silently, particularly because I knew that the Krasnodar bishop, Isidor, had cooperated closely with the KGB for years and was one of the church’s more despicable  informers.” And so, at one point, when the bishop attacked Kalugin, he responded, in front of a crowd, “You in the church hierarchy are all KGB stooges and you have the insolence  to brand me a traitor? I know, Bishop Isidor, that you are a longtime KGB agent and I know who your case officer is.” Kalugin observed that a priest simply didn’t rise in the church’s hierarchy unless he collaborated with the KGB.

And so the Orthodox Church in Russia was totally compromised and ended up doing the bidding of the Russian secret police. There are a lot of independent church groups in Russia and the Ukraine today and this is a situation they have got to learn to watch out for.

Vladimir Putin is an ex-KGB man. According to some sources I have seen he would like to construct a new Russia somewhat along the lines of the old Soviet model. If he is able to pull this off, then what will that mean for the Christian churches in Russia? That’s something they need to think about. And if Russia’s “disbanded” (actually decentralized) state security, the FSB, gains more power that it supposedly now has, what will that mean for churches in Russia and other places?

What will it mean for churches in this country if the Cultural Marxism that has become so prevalent in many of them is not exposed for what it really is—Marxism? I realize most Christians today just don’t want to deal with any of this. They are waiting for the “rapture” to remove them so they don’t have to mess with it and they can just let this old world go to hell while they escape. Folks, suppose it doesn’t quite happen that way? Suppose the Lord wants us all to stay around for awhile and learn to deal with some of this stuff. Suppose He wants us to hang around and contend for the culture we see around us—to actually contend for it with a redemptive purpose? Suppose He wants us to get our noses out of those Scofield “Bible” Notes and deal with the real world? Are we willing to do that? What we leave our children and grandchildren in the next couple generations may well depend on how we answer that question.



The Mess In the Ukraine

by Al Benson Jr.


By now everyone has heard at least a little about what has been going on in the Ukraine, a former Soviet state that still has ties to Putin’s Russia.

There have been riots there, with the president Viktor Yanukovych claiming that he and his administration are the victims of “radicals.” It seems that most of the protesters have been doing just that—protesting what they feel is a corrupt government. A Reformed pastor in the Ukraine has been following the situation and he seems to have a lot more in the ball than the typical evangelical does.  He presents a view of this situation you will not get from the “news” media. He has observed: “First, what is going on in the Ukraine is not for the European Union or against Russia.  It is about the Ukrainian people’s dignity and destiny. They are tired of a corrupt government which acts like a tyrant, robbing and looting from its people, and they hate a judicial system where no one can find justice. They are exhausted from overtaxation and they want a chance to not  just work hard, but to also have opportunities for good business and normal lives. The current protests began on November 21, not in loyalty to a certain political party or government, but in protest against President Viktor Yanukovych suddenly changing the course of the nation. Even though he had promised them for several years to pursue ties with the EU, President Yanukovych refused to sign the free trade deal and instead seemed to switch to his other option, the proposed Russian, Belarusian, Kazakhstan customs union.  Many Ukrainians see association with the EU as moving toward a future of freedom of speech, equality and human rights, and an accountable democratic government.  The proposed Eurasian Economic Union is none of these things. It is a hierarchically-run system without election, where many rulers hold complete power indefinitely. Since coming to power, President Yanukovych has illegally changed the constitution, taking Ukraine from a constitutional court to a presidential republic. Almost all power has been consolidated into his party including the appointment of  parliament members and judges. Even though we know these elections are only facades, it is impossible to prove anything with such a corrupt system and no resources…President Yanukovych can rob Ukraine and Ukrainian people and live like a sultan…His family and party continue to work like a criminal network and mafia while laundering money through foreign banks. Average salaries in Ukraine continue to stay very small, while prices rise higher and higher beyond US or EU expenses. How can people survive in these conditions? President Yanukovych’s sudden movement away from the EU was another betrayal of the desires of his people and the future they want for their country.” I’m not really sure the EU would be all that great for these folks either. It might end up being the lesser of two evils.

Anyway, not overly happy with the direction their “El Presidente” was taking them in, several hundred people responded by protesting in Kiev’s Independence Square or the “Maidan.” These protests lasted nine days, but they were peaceful protests—at least they were peaceful until the riot police came in on November 30th and started severely beating unarmed protesters, many of which were only students. After this unwarranted assault by the riot police (sounds just like what happened during the textbook protest in West Virginia in the 1970s) on December 1st, 500,000 people responded by gathering in Independence Square. The protesters have continually tried to negotiate for a peaceful solution to the problems with Yanukovych’s regime, which has apparently been unresponsive and the situation has gotten worse over the past 90 days.

Each time violence started, Yanukovych received more communication from the EU and the US, exhorting a resolution and action against those responsible for hurting peaceful protesters. Unfortunately, that’s probably all the Ukrainian people will ever get from either the US or the EU—pious exhortations to their oppressors. And Yanukovych probably realized this, because no one responsible was ever punished. Yanukovych continued to break his word to opposition leaders and protesters, to the point where the Ukrainian people have desired, and required, his resignation from office, which would, hopefully, lead to his imprisonment. At this point, although he has not officially resigned and still claims to be president, the protest has grown to the point where he has fled the capital and the protesters seem to be in control and there is talk of forming a new government.

The Reformed pastor mentioned earlier noted that, earlier, Yanukovych’s only other option seemed to be “…to rule his own people like a tyrant while actually becoming a vassal of Russian President Putin…President Yanukovych is holding onto his office as long as possible, following the example of President Alexander Lukashenko of Belarlus (20 years), President Putin of Russia (18 years), and President Nursultan Nazarbayev of Kazakstan (self-declared president for life). The people of Ukraine do not want to join these dictatorships—they want freedom of speech and respect for humanity, and they thought they could look for this in the ideals of the west.” While that is a noble sentiment on their part, in all honesty, those ideals no longer exist in the west. In fact, the previous ideals of the west have been so watered down that the west is becoming more and more reminiscent of the old Soviet Union—an agenda that has been at work in the west for well over half a century, with hardly anyone not part of the One World government cabal  realizing it.

The pastor continued: “The government tries to call this a civil war, but it is not. It is Ukrainian citizens willing to take responsibility for their country and for their future…The division is not between eastern and western Ukraine. We have always dealt with these differences. Yes, there are people still under a Soviet mentality and these people are primarily in the east. They are used to relying on the government and being manipulated by propaganda from the president. If they have food and some shop money they support the government. But these are only a small group in Ukraine and they do not support the killing of innocent civilians. President Yanukovych paid people to stage a fake gathering in support of his government, but all of these people went home, while people risk everything to stay at Maidan. He cannot understand that the people stay, not because of money,  but for freedom and the future of their country and their children. People in Kyiv (Kiev) and in the whole country have supported these protests sending representatives, money, food, and medicine. This is not a civil war. It is a war against the government which is trying to crush its own people. As Christians, we, of course, pray and support by bringing food and clothes. We send representatives to Maidan. One of our Evangelical leaders put a prayer tent in Maidan where volunteers bring money and food and make sandwiches for the protesters…I was there at the end of January while parliament was supposed to make important decisions. Unfortunately, our parliament is entirely under President Yanukovych’s power and nothing changes.” Hence the legitimate protests of the populace. People have a legitimate right and an obligation to protest when government goes beyond what its God-given functions are and usurps power that does not rightfully belong to it. The pastor stated: “We need more Christian leaders.  All of the churches are deeply involved and there are many priests who have stayed on Maidan. The people have responded to repeated crackdowns on the protesters by building barricades and defending themselves with helmets, smoke from tires, and Molotov cocktails.  In recent days they have used stones from the street against special forces officers with semi-automatics or sniper rifles. Protesters have been kidnapped, imprisoned, tortured, and killed, some with metal bullets meant to stop armored cars. Even though police forces claim to use only rubber bullets and stun grenades, these bullets, which are designed to pierce 5 ml steel, have been found in bodies.  The stun grenades which they use are very powerful and designed in Russia.  They are meant to throw on the ground several meters away from anyone, but police have thrown them right into crowds and even into  a young woman’s backpack. They explode with very hot, plastic shrapnel…Over 1200 protesters have been wounded, but they are too afraid to go to hospitals, where people have disappeared, been tortured, and even killed. The special riot police or ‘Berkut’ used against the protesters originally began in the 90s to protect the Communist Party…President Yanukovych is also using a third group referred to as ‘Titushki.’ These are hired thugs and released criminals protected and armed by the police…Special army paratrooper brigades  are being called to Kyiv under the smokescreen  of an ‘anti-terrorist’ operation. There is no terrorist danger in Ukraine. Propaganda and TV, especially in industrial and urban centers, is being used to create a national guard willing to kill all the people who stay in Maidan…We have sent one minister from the Alliance of Christian Reformed Churches of Ukraine to constantly be there.  We have sent good young men. We need firearms to defend ourselves and we need human arms to help…” Sounds like some of the churches in the Ukraine are considerably more alert than many churches here.

As stated earlier, although not officially relinquishing power, Yanukovych has fled Kiev and no one knows where he now is. I think it behooves us to pray for these protesters and for the freedom they are trying so valiantly to bring to their country. I pray also that they exercise discernment in who they trust because many in the west will not do them anymore good than will Putin and the Russians.

Personally, I wouldn’t trust the European Union and its minions anymore than I would Putin and the Russians.

The Corruption of Socialism

by Al Benson Jr.

Over the years I have heard some people try to make a case for the promotion of socialism from the Book of Acts in the Bible, particularly from Acts 2:44-47. This, they claim, shows that the early Christians were socialists and so we should all emulate their “Christian” socialism in our lives and in our countries today. The only problem with these folks is that they want government to implement this socialism in our lives, and that is a system that never works.

Decades ago now, the last Episcopal Church we attended had a pastor that knew a little bit about communism and communists and he would warn his congregation about communism from time to time. I remember once that someone attending the church brought this up and the pastor stated, quite correctly, “You can’t make a case for communism from Acts 2.” For one thing, Acts 5 puts a real damper on the communism idea. This is the familiar story of where Ananias and his wife sold something, a piece of land or whatever and kept back part of the price and lied about what they had sold it for. When the Apostle Peter confronted Ananias about this he said: “Whiles it remained, was it not thine own? And after it was sold, was it not in thine own power?” The sin of Ananias and his wife was not that they kept part of the money—they were free to do that if they wanted to. The sin was that they lied about it. Had they given only part of the money and made that point clear there would have been no problem. Their keeping part of it while claiming to have given over all of it was their problem. As far as I can see, this narrative pretty much kills the idea of “communism” in the church. The implication here is that while they owned the property it was theirs to do with as they pleased as long as they didn’t lie about it.

Also, years back, I remember Rev. Ennio Cugini of the Clayville Church in Rhode Island talking about this issue. He noted that when people shared their goods voluntarily it was Christian charity. When the government forced them to share it was communism. He was correct.

In our day, no one but the willfully blind would contend that we live in anything but a socialist country and that fact has become even more blatantly evident since the entrance of the current regime. The president stated, up front, when he ran the first time that he would “fundamentally transform the United States…” No one at that point had a clue as to what he meant except his voting bloc over on the far left and the CFR/Trilateral Commission people that control both political parties. They all knew because their agenda for this country calls for it to be dragged to the far left, kicking and screaming. They stated decades ago that their intent was to so reduce our standard of living here that we could be comfortably merged with the Soviet Union. And when they made sure Obama got elected they knew they had just the man to do that. His followers are still expecting all those freebies he promised them, which someone else has to pay for, and they haven’t yet figured out that, in the final analysis, he will give all of them the shaft along with the rest of us. They’ve been his “useful idiots” and he has made use of them. They have yet to notice that what he says is usually the exact opposite of what he does—same pattern as Abraham Lincoln, who folks thought “must have been a Christian” because he quoted Scripture. So what can you say—Lincoln and Obama—equal opportunity socialists!

Socialism is corrupt, and evil, because it steals from those who work and gives it to those who won’t. Socialist governments “redistribute the wealth,” taking from the producers of that wealth and handing it over to the deadbeats who have no intention of working as long as someone else is forced to foot their food bill, and their cable television bill, and their entertainment bill and whatever else a socialist regime feels they are entitled to at the expense of those who labor to earn their bread and pay their rent.

Most folks have heard of Walter Williams. He is a black man who is the John M. Olin distinguished professor of economics at George Mason University. Professor Williams is a syndicated columnist as well, and he is noted for telling it exactly like it is and letting the chips fall where they may. I’ve been reading his columns for years and I have yet to see him pussyfoot around the truth. I have tried to get some black folks I’ve known to read his articles. Mostly they are not even interested. He won’t play the “Whitey owes me” game and so most don’t care to read the difficult truths he presents. Much easier to listen to Je$$e Jack$on rant and believe his racialist drivel.

Walter Williams has written about socialism over the years. In a recent column he commented on socialism. He said: “It employs evil means, confiscation and intimidation, to accomplish what are often seen s noble goals—namely, helping one’s fellow man. Helping one’s fellow man in need by reaching into one’s own pockets to do so is laudable and praiseworthy. Helping one’s fellow man through coercion and reaching into another’s pockets is evil and worthy of condemnation. Tragically, most teachings, from the church on down, support government use of one person to serve the purposes of another; the advocates cringe from calling it such and prefer to call it charity or duty.” No matter what they choose to call it, it’s still socialism—government redistribution of your wealth to serve the interest of some other person or group who usually can’t be bothered working to take care of their own needs.

Awhile back an article by the late Rev. R. J. Rushdoony appeared on and it was about the total control of socialism. Rushdoony observed: “Socialism rests on two foundations: First,  managed money, counterfeit money, or paper money. Since money is the life-blood of economics, control of an economy requires control of money. When money controls begin, socialism ensues, whether it is intended or not. Second,  planning is the next requirement. To manage an economy it is necessary to increase the controls over the economy and this calls for ever increasing planning and finally total planning…Planning means several things. First, its goal is total control over man in order to provide man all the benefits socialism offers. For socialism to function, total control is necessary…In total planning, the state takes the place of God, and it gives us predestination by man, predestination by the socialist state, as the substitute for God’s predestination…The stronger the state becomes, the more extensive becomes it planning, and the more serious its penalties for non-conformity.” Sound like anything you ever heard of? The Soviet Union? This country? Rushdoony’s comments touch a raw nerve in both.

The state taking the place of God is a theme that runs strongly through all branches of leftist socialism, from the excesses of Stalin and those that followed him right on down to leftist fascism (because fascism really is on the left, not the right, as most folks have been brainwashed into believing). In his book The First Directorate Oleg Kalugin wrote about his mother’s reaction to the death of Stalin. She said: “Our father is dead. It’s not only our father who’s died, but also God, who kept us all under His wing.” And Kalugin, who was just a youngster at the time, wrote, in his diary, “Stalin isn’t dead. He cannot die. His physical death is just a formality, but one that needn’t deprive people of their faith in the future. The fact that Stalin is still alive will be proven by our country’s every new success…” When I first read that I thought “This is the rankest form of idolatry.” Yet this is what socialism breeds, idolatrous leaders who become the leaders of tightly controlled states where there is no real rule of law except what the ruling oligarchy deems acceptable and every other thought is considered treasonous, especially religious thought. Ever wonder why communist and socialist states are so hard on Christ and Christians? They recognize in Him what they aspire to themselves and they consider Him to be their Chief Competition, and so if they can just get rid of Him they can then run the show. They are would-be usurpers of God’s throne. And “would-be” is the proper description for them because no matter how hard they labor or what they do, they will never make it, but they will make the lives of millions miserable in their attempts, and considering who they serve, that might be enough for them in the long run. And Russia isn’t the only place prone to such delusions. On a recent television interview commentator Barbara Walters made a statement about Obama to the effect that “We thought he would be the messiah.” It only proves that socialists in Amerika are just as deluded.

Socialists are guilty of breaking at least three of the Ten Commandments. The first is the one having to do with having other gods before Him. Many socialists and communists are overtly guilty of this one. If they place their leaders or their states above God and try to ignore Him and His Law, they are idolators. Then there is the one that says “Thou shalt not steal.” Socialists are noted for breaking this one because when they confiscate from the so-called “haves” to bestow their goods upon the “have-nots” it can only be called theft. That’s not Christian compassion—that’s theft, pure and simple, just like our fiat money is theft. Then there is the one about coveting. You don’t covet anything that belongs to your neighbor, including his wife, his house, and his livestock. In the case of the house and livestock, these are private property and the right to own them is God-given. Therefore, even Naboth could tell King Ahab, who wanted his vineyard, that he couldn’t have it. Ahab eventually got it the way most socialists do, by eliminating their legitimate opposition. When it comes right down to it that’s usually the way most socialists and communists get anything.

It seems to me that Christians, considering the devious nature of socialism and its adherents, ought to be speaking out against it with a certain amount of vigor. Unfortunately, though, many Christians seem all too willing to make common cause with radical socialists, while at the same time being willing to trash those they consider to be on the “hard right” (that’s anybody that doesn’t agree with them), labeling them as “lacking in compassion and love.” In all honesty, when have the socialist and communist types ever displayed any real love, except for what belongs to others?

In our day maybe some in the church need to get their thinking straightened out as to what constitutes love and what constitutes theft.

The Secret Police, Christianity, and Justice

by Al Benson Jr.

Several years ago, in a market of all places, I got into what could be called a lively discussion about the demise, or lack thereof, of the Soviet KGB, Russia’s Committee of State Security. The young man on the other side of the discussion, who had lived in Russia, confidently told me the KGB had been disbanded and that was that—no more secret police after the Berlin Wall came down. I disagreed with him, which did not endear me to him. His claim to having lived in Russia was, no doubt true, but having read all that I have over the years, along with all the knowledgeable people I have talked with, convinced me that he, like many others, didn’t really know what he was talking about. He was only parroting  an establishment line he had been fed and had never bothered doing any homework about the subject. Seeing that he worked for the market we argued in, a couple of his co-workers moved to restrain his “enthusiasm” about the subject, possibly afraid I might complain to the manager about him. I probably would not have, but they didn’t know that.

Like many people today, he had learned everything he thought he knew from television and the “news” papers. More informed sources, even today, disagree with him.

Lawrence Kohn, in an article on  for November 2, 2013, made a couple penetrating observations. He stated: “Vladimir Putin’s out-maneuvering of President Obama following the Syrian chemical weapons attack has led some to ask if Putin is reviving the Cold War purportedly won by the U.S. The question itself reflects a lack of understanding of the unbroken continuity of Cold War behavior by Moscow since the transition from the Soviet Union to the ‘new’ Russia. In Russia the KGB was never disbanded following the advent of the Yeltsin regime in December 1991 despite a number of name changes and reorganizations. The decision by the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) in December 1992 to substitute for the celebration of the first anniversary of the service the celebration of the 72nd anniversary of Lenin’s CHEKA reflected the unbroken continuity  of the power and status of the Soviet secret police…The dramatic events between Gorbachev’s last year and Yeltsin’s first, portrayed world-wide on television, although exhibiting peculiar aspects such as Gorbachev’s ability to broadcast a video while under house arrest and the KGB coup plotters’ failure to cut Yeltsin’s communication lines, masked the strategic continuity between the Soviet Union and Russia.” In other words, folks, nothing has changed behind, or in front, of the Iron Curtain but the names. Changed names, same game.

Shaun Walker, writing in theguardian  for October 6, 2013 has observed: “The FSB is much more than just an ordinary security service. Combining the functions of an elite police force with those of a spy agency, and wielding immense power, it has come a long way since the early 1990s when it was on the brink of imploding. Today’s agency draws a direct line of inheritance from the Cheka, set up by Vladimir Lenin in the months after the Bolshevik revolution, to the NKVD, notorious for the purges of the 1930s in which hundreds of thousands were executed, and then the KGB. As the Soviet Union disbanded, the KGB was dismembered into separate agencies,…As the 1990s wore on the agency got back on its feet and in 1999 Boris Yeltsin asked its then director, Vladimir Putin, who had recently been catapulted into the top job after a career in the service’s lower echelons, to become prime minister. With Putin as PM and then president, much of FSB’s power was restored. Many of his former KGB colleagues ended up in senior positions in government or at the helm of state-controlled companies…” Like I said, the names change but the game stays the same. I wouldn’t expect my young Russian debater to have grasped all of this. It’s interesting, though, that these articles have all come out just last year, which shows that the KGB isn’t exactly dead news.

In recent months, I have read books by Arkady Shevchenko, Peter Deriaban, and Stanislas Levchenko—all ex-KGB case officers and all defectors from the Soviet Union to the free world. Years ago I read a book by Anatoli Granovsky called I Was An NKVD Agent and I read a couple written by John Barron, who worked for Reader’s Digest, on the KGB.

I mention all of these to make a point. And that is that, without exception, all of these men openly testify to the moral corruption of the Soviet secret police. The Russians that defected that I have read about had major problems with their consciences after years in the KGB. They got to the point where doing the subversive work they did literally made some of them sick—in soul as well as in body. That’s not to say that they were all totally virtuous. Like all human beings they were sinners and, at times, did some things they would have been better off not doing. However, even taking that into consideration, the climate they found in the KGB and in the Soviet Union in general was so completely corrupted that their consciences rebelled at some point and they could take no more. And, again, this is not to say that all American (so-called) security agencies are all as pure as the driven snow either, especially not in recent administrations. It seems that the more this country travels down the road to socialism the more corrupt we get here.

The late Presbyterian theologian, R. J. Rushdoony observed in this book Law and Liberty that: “Take away God’s standard of righteousness from the law, and you strip the law of justice and reduce it to anti-law. Without justice, the law becomes a form of theft. Stripped of justice, the law becomes an instrument of extortion and oppression in the hands of whatever group of men control it…And today, because God’s righteousness is despised, the nations of the world are becoming robber states and lands without justice…With socialism, or legalized robbery, the appetite for robbery is only increased.”

And Rushdoony continued: “As a result, while socialism calls itself the workers’ state, it is, in actuality a robbers’ state, wherein the robbers live off the workers and insist that the workers thank them for this new paradise! Nowhere are workers more oppressed than under socialism, and yet they are continually asked to hail, praise, and thank the thieves who live off them.” That’s the way it is under socialism and Marxism. Does any of that sound remotely familiar to the citizens of America? Rushdoony is not bashful about labeling socialism as theft and he is correct. Unfortunately in our less sane day, many Christians have been brainwashed into labeling it as compassion, which shows that they have been educated in such a way that they are not capable of telling the difference between liberty and slavery. It’s like “1984” has arrived and “freedom is slavery” and “less is more.”

Did Rushdoony do what many Christians today seem to be in favor of, accepting socialism as the new wave of “Christian compassion?” He most assuredly did not. In fact, he stated: “Basic therefore to every resistance to the criminal syndicate states are two things: first, personal faith in Christ as Savior, and, second, God’s righteousness as the foundation of civil order, of law, and of  justice. Apart from this, we are merely fighting humanism with more humanism…” So Rushdoony recognized the fact that socialism should be resisted—a position that many Christians today would consider “unloving.”

And he recognized that when true justice is taken out of a court room, “that court simply becomes a political tool whereby one class oppresses another, and justice is replaced by injustice. This, of course, is the theory of Marxist law, for communism uses the law and the courts as a tool for the dictatorship of the proletariat and the oppression of all who in any way oppose, disagree with, or fall out of the favor of the totalitarian state.” So Soviet courts and law are the intended and end result of radical humanism. And this is why many rebel against them, and against a godless humanist system that uses its secret police and its military to promote a worldview that can only be considered anti-Christ.

So what can Christians do? For one thing, they can work to learn the truth about socialism and Marxism and then they can expose that truth to those willing to listen (Ephesians 5:11). They can learn to recognize socialism in this country when it rears its ugly head, often at the local level as well as the national level and they can oppose it where they find it. That might mean going to your local town council meeting and speaking out against the UN’s Agenda 21 program if it has been introduced into your area as it has in many places around the country. But, no matter what the Lord leads you to do (and if you are sincere, He will lead you) you need to always remember that you can only do it effectively in His strength and not your own.

I’ve never forgotten what a Presbyterian pastor told me awhile back when I told him I had some problems with loving my enemies. He knew who I meant and he said “You love them by opposing the evil that they do.” That’s a different answer than you get from most humanistically-trained Christians in our day, but it’s one I can identify with. The Marxists still run Russia and its secret police—no matter what they call them today. And we have the Marxists in this country also, many in Washington in positions of power, and they want to turn this country into the same “workers’ paradise” that Russia is and has been. The ultimate question there is, will the Christians let them? The answer to that is yet to be determined.

Taxes And Our Lack Of Liberty

by Al Benson Jr.

Anyone doing any serious reflection today about our true situation in this country has to realize that we are much less “free” than in earlier days. We are bound by many rules, regulations, and taxes in our day that would have caused people in a saner day to conclude that we, indeed, are living in a state of near slavery, which we ignorantly define as “freedom.”

In the past I have written about the property tax and how it is one of the most iniquitous taxes there is. The late Rev. R. J. Rusdoony expressed much the same sentiment in his book Law and Liberty, which is truly worth reading for its many insights. It can be found on

In fact Law and Liberty has a chapter devoted to law and property. Rushdoony said of the property tax: “The Bible did not have provision for any property tax; indeed, it saw it only as a form of tyranny and confiscation (1Sam. 8:7-18)…Originally, none of the American states permitted a property tax, and all were hostile to it…Because the state could not tax property, a man was secure in his land, home, and possessions in good times and bad.” Now, thanks to the property tax, no man has the security anymore and we are less free for having lost it.

The socialists and Marxists eagerly contend that property rights are a major roadblock to what they call “human rights.” They conveniently forget that property rights are also human rights. You have to understand, for the Marxist, that property rights are a big impediment to his right to take away your rights and make you subservient to “the state.” A major part of his agenda is, therefore, the abolition of private property, which must necessitate also abolishing the family, another Marxist goal.

And the property tax is also used to further yet one more goal of Marxism—the public school system. Look at your next property tax bill and see how much of it goes toward what they euphemistically refer to as “public education.”

Again, Rushdoony stated: “When a man is secure in the possession of his property, he has an area of liberty and dominion which is beyond the reach of other men. If no man and no state can reach in to tax or to confiscate his property, man can enjoy true liberty and great security, whether he be prosperous or poor. Every attack on private property is, therefore, an attack on man’s liberty.” And that is the way it was intended to be. So the state wants to be sure you have no property—real property, personal property, or monetary property that they can’t get their hands on. Personal property would include such things as your firearms, which, as we well  know, are under constant attack from the current Marxist regime. And there is talk about them also raiding people’s retirement funds, 401 Ks and what not. It would seem that our current dictator feels he is much better qualified to spend the money you worked all your life to put aside for your retirement than you are. Besides, maybe with Obamacare and those death panels you won’t need that much of it anyway.

However, under our current situation, no man really “owns” his own property anymore anyway. As long as you are subject to the property tax they can throw you off your own property if you don’t pay it so you don’t really own it in the truest sense of the word—you rent it off whatever governing authority is in power when your tax payment comes due.

This isn’t that difficult to figure out and I am surprised that more people have not discerned this. Christians don’t seem to discern it anymore than anyone else and some of them even brag about enjoying the payment of taxes because it is the price of living in a “free country.” They fail to realize that those taxes they are so eager to pay are actually a restriction on their liberty. But, then, if they were educated in government schools there is almost no chance they were taught any of this, and sadly, most Christian schools don’t touch it either. It seems that we are happy to contribute to the diminishing of our God-given liberties by our willing silence.

In 1966 the state of Nebraska did away with the property tax at the state level and passed the dubious responsibility off to local governments, which might be a tad more responsive to the local folks, but there are no guarantees of that.

As I said at the start, the property tax is among the most iniquitous taxes there are. They finance a government school system that undermines our liberty by under-educating our children, or by mis-educating them. I have a batch of files I have collected that will more than prove the truth of that statement. It would seem that if tax money is really needed, and I’m not sure they really need all they collect, another way could be found to collect it other than taxing a man’s property and taking it away if he doesn’t pay your tax.

Christians in particular need to become much more aware of the implications of the property tax and they need to work to make others aware and, where possible, maybe they need to conduct some sort of public awareness program as to what property taxes do to  our ownership of our property. Another issue that might also be tackled is the one of bond issues to raise money for schools or other projects. There is a lot of money to be made off bond issues, many of which are a bane rather than a blessing for the taxpaying public.

A noted tax economist, Frederick C. Stocker has described the property tax as “…a structure designed by a mad architect, erected on a shaky foundation by an incompetent builder and made worse by the well-intentioned repair work of hordes of amateur tinkerers.”

Writer R. William Potter wrote in August of 2010 on about this tax. He said: “…the local property tax—which goes up even if the owner is unemployed. New Jersey is second only to New Hampshire in reliance on local property taxes, at more than twice the national average.  Garden Staters also pay a sales tax and an income tax dedicated to reducing local property taxes. So bear in mind that an attack on the state income tax means less money available to reduce property taxes—which some academics have dubbed it ‘the worst tax’ of all. How bad is it? Consider the impacts of a property tax on investment.  The more you spend to modernize your old house, the higher the assessment and the more you are taxed, even if you’ve lost your job since installing that back porch or central AC.”

Further, Potter says: “The property tax is the engine of ‘surburban sprawl’ that has drained the cities of ratables where the poor are concentrated, and in the ‘burbs’ it drives up the cost of local services and creates the need for  higher—you guessed it—property taxes.”

Sounds like property taxes are a self-perpetuating political organism that takes more and more of people’s money without giving them any benefit whatever—thereby, as Rushdoony said, restricting their liberties. So the property taxes  are a major source of funds for public schools. In that case, what about people that don’t use, or have never used, public schools? Why should they have to pay for them? Our kids never attended public schools even for a day. Yet I have, over the years, had to pay for what I consider to be instruments of an anti-Christian worldview and, frankly, if I am going to support any kind of a school, I would rather it be a Christian school.

There are lots of questions that need to be dealt with about the property tax and it wouldn’t hurt a bit if Christians started to learn how to deal with them in the public square rather than just quietly stepping up to the cashier’s window at the town hall and obediently forking over their cash.

Is Communism REALLY Dead?

by Al Benson Jr.

Is Communism really dead? That’s a question many have asked and few have answered satisfactorily.  Many seem to think that because the Berlin Wall was torn down Communism was officially dead, the KGB (secret police) were disbanded and all became sweetness and light in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. This is the same mindset that equates the surrender of Robert E. Lee at Appomattox with the surrender of the Confederate States of America at the end of our “Civil War.” Only problem is that it never happened and the historically ignorant haven’t figured that out yet, just like they haven’t figured out that because the Berlin Wall came down Communism didn’t end when the last brick in the wall was tossed onto the trash heap.

Recently, I read an interesting article on the American Thinker website written by Jason McNew and entitled Did Communism Fake Its Own Death in 1991? In his article Mr. McNew mentions an ex-KGB Major named Anatoliy Golitsyn who wrote a book back in 1984 in which he predicted that the “liberalization” or the fall of the Soviet bloc was nothing more than a strategic deception. I read Mr. Golitsyn’s book back in the early 1990s. But, then, as I often have done, I lent it to someone and never got it back.

In commenting on Golitsyn’s book, McNew says: New Lies For Old  is not light reading, and all of Golitsyn’s predictions appear in the last two chapters, some 327 pages in. Golitsyn began drafting the manuscript in 1968, completed it in 1980, cleared the CIA in 1982, and then finalized and published it in 1984…” You sure can’t say it was a rush job. McNew continued: “Put simply, Golitsyn’s argument was that beginning about 1960, the Soviet Union embarked on a strategy of massive long-range strategic deception which would span several decades and result in the destruction of Western capitalism and the erection of a communist world government. Throughout his works, he refers to this future event as ‘convergence.’” McNew also cites author Mark Riebling who said that: “of Golitsyn’s falsifiable predictions, 139 out of 148 were fulfilled by the end of 1993—an accuracy rate of 94 percent.”

Some critics have pointed out that Golitsyn didn’t get it all right, but McNew points out that “Taken as a complete work, however, Golitsyn got most of it right.” And he notes: “There is other evidence that corroborates Golitsyn’s thesis. In his 1982 book We Will Bury You,  Czech defector Jan Sejna also claimed the Berlin Wall would be torn down and the Warsaw Pact dissolved for reasons of deception…Jeff Nyquist, an independent writer and the author of…Origins of the Fourth World War, seems to be the only Western journalist who not only noticed but paid much attention to Golitsyn. Nyquist has written hundreds of articles discussing both Golitsyn’s thesis and the slow moral and economic decay of America.” Has anyone ever thought there just might be some correlation between the two?

And then McNew leaves us with a very telling thought, one we should consider. He ends with: “The present moral and economic bankruptcy emanating from Washington, D.C. and plaguing America portends something far more dangerous than the unintended consequences of electing so many ideological flunkies with bad educations and misguided ideals. The purpose of warfare is not to kill and maim your enemy; it is his social, economic, political, and religious reorientation. Somewhere Sun Tzu is smiling, and it isn’t at America.” Folks, what it all boils down to is this—it ain’t all happening by accident. I don’t think the West can even begin to grasp the concept of a plan of Communist strategic deception that takes 40-50 years to complete. As far as we are concerned, if we can’t do it in 60 days or less, why bother?

In October of 2010, Mr. McNew was interviewed by Frontpage Mag and he made some worthwhile statements. He noted: “While there were many Soviet defectors during the Cold War, the majority of them were providing (knowingly or not) information which was purposefully designed by the Soviets to mislead their main enemy, the United States and its CIA. It wasn’t until 1984 with the publication of his first book, New Lies For Old  that Anatoliy Golitsyn became known to the public. His book, most of which had actually been written before 1980, was ridiculed and ignored…The re-emergence of communism now (albeit with all manner of different names) craves explanation. Clearly communism did not just ‘die’ in 1991 as everyone was led (told) to believe. Golitsyn’s works are the key to understanding how the ancient principles of Sun Tzu (warfare based on deception) can be practically applied as a comprehensive national strategy. This is exactly what the Soviets (and now the ‘neo-Soviets’) have done. By ‘neo-Soviets’ I mean Vladimir Putin and his ilk in the Kremlin and Lubyanka.” McNew has told us a lot here in just a few sentences.

Warfare by deception! Something we don’t even think about. We are not educated to think in those terms.

Yet, how much material have we all seen from Russia Today  on either television or You Tube? And you have to admit, some of it sounds pretty good. They tell you the truth in many cases and you can’t help but finding yourself agreeing with much of what they say given the abysmal job our own media is doing (on purpose). The Russian newspaper Pravda  has been putting material out of late that sounds downright conservative. They’ve even told us that Marxism is rife in this country, and that’s true. Anyone who even remotely begins to look around and think has to see that. If this character that has been put in the White House moves any further to the left he will trip over Stalin or Ho Chi Minh, not that such would bother him all that much. He’d figure he was in good company. Even the conservatives are starting to pay attention to Russia Today  and Pravda. We see articles and videos on the Internet that tell us of Putin’s “Christian values” as they compare him to Comrade Obama.

Has anyone ever even wondered why the Russians are telling us this much truth? If they have, I haven’t noticed it yet, and our own media is strangely silent (no surprise there). Conservatives and patriotic people find themselves relying on Russia Today  and Pravda  to get their world news. So we are, in many instances, getting our news and information from communist sources. I realize that, at this point, someone will inform me that these sources are no longer “communist” and so we can trust them implicitly.  Sorry folks, but it’s hogwash. Back on April 27th 2012  I did an article on called From Russia Without Love. Since my blog spot gets to around 100 countries, I got quite a few views on that article from the Russian Federation, as you can imagine. I expect this one may get a few also.

I’m sorry, but with my suspicious mind, I question the sense of depending on news from either Russia or the old Soviet Bloc countries. I think we are being had. We know we can’t trust our own media for the truth—but should we end up trusting the Russian media for it? Stop and think about it. For Heaven’s sake, folks, stop and do a little serious reflection. Communism isn’t dead. The KGB has only undergone minute reforms along with a name change. And Putin is no more our friend that any of the other Soviet dictators were, even though he won a “democratic” election in Russia.

This whole scenario is one we need to seriously rethink, and maybe if you can get a copy of Golitsyn’s book you need to plow through some of that and grasp where he is coming from. It’s listed on

Lafayette Curry Baker—Head of the American KGB

by Al Benson Jr.

Nathaniel Weyl wrote an informative book back in the early 1950s called The Battle Against Disloyalty.  There was a good deal of information in it about different eras in this country but there was one chapter, chapter six, that caught my attention. It was titled “Stanton’s Secret Police.”

Since I have, of late, been reading some books dealing with the Soviet Secret Police, the dreaded KGB, which is supposed to have been “disbanded” but has really gone through little more than a name change, I found this of interest. Weyl draws parallels between Stanton’s Secret Police, or the military Secret Service, and the Soviet secret police.

Weyl noted, on page 67, that: “In the Civil War and Reconstruction eras, the United States War Department bore some traces of resemblance to the Soviet secret police.  Its leaders were zealots who believed that, if the end didn’t justify the means, nothing else could.” In other words, they were what I have called “Yankee/Marxists.” Weyl continued: “Wherever possible, they operated in secrecy through military, rather than civilian courts. Guilt by association became a fundamental axiom; perjury was richly rewarded; when political exigencies dictated it, even the President of the United States was arraigned on spectral evidence…During the war years, General La Fayette Curry Baker was chief of the military Secret Service…In February, 1862, Baker’s Detective Bureau was transferred from Secretary of State Seward to War Secretary Edwin M. Stanton. Promoted to the rank of brigadier general, Baker was clothed with almost limitless powers as special provost marshal of the War Department. In Washington he used the methods that had proved so successful in his vigilante days, disregarding due process of law, habeas corpus, or any of the other constitutional frills that normally prevent the imprisonment of Americans at the whim of the military.”

Baker wrote a book about his “exploits” which many have noted is short on fact and long on self-congratulations. Weyl described him as: “An enormously vain and unscrupulous person, Baker was also a congenital liar, intriguer, and twister. A talented counterspy, he was a wretched administrator.” Weyl noted of Edwin M. Stanton that: “The ultimate plans of Stanton cannot be fathomed, but the trend he represented was totalitarian.” And Baker was a willing part of all that.

The site had an interesting article, posted on April 24, 2013 that dealt with Stanton and his secret agents. It stated: “When news spread of his heroic exploits, Secretary of War Edwin M. Stanton recruited Baker to be the head of the Union Intelligence Service. Stanton then gave him a job as head of the National Detective Police. In this capacity, Baker operated essentially as the head of a secret police, seeking out and punishing any activity he deemed corrupt or rebellious. Most of Baker’s time was spent tracking down deserters from the Union Army. He also went after profiteers but only to line his own pockets. Baker arrested and jailed those who refused to share their illegal spoils from selling government supplies. Baker violated constitutional rights without fear or reservations since he was wholly backed by Stanton. He routinely made false arrests, conducted illegal searches without warrants, and blackmailed government officials into making endorsements of his almost non-existent espionage service. No one misused his authority or office more than Lafayette Baker.  He developed a reputation for arresting and punishing suspects, ‘without warrant, or the semblance of law or justice.’” At one point, Baker discovered severe corruption in the Treasury Department, and it has been claimed that the only reason he bothered to bring it out into the open was that he didn’t get a cut. One official from the Treasury Department stated plainly that: “Baker became a law unto himself. He instituted a veritable Reign of Terror.

In a classic pre-NSA caper, Baker was eventually caught tapping telegraph lines between Nashville and his boss, Stanton’s, office. This earned him a demotion and he was shuttled off to New York to be placed under the jurisdiction of Charles Dana, Assistant Secretary of War and friend of Karl Marx. You can read about Mr. Dana in the book Lincoln’s Marxists. He had quite a leftist career, so typical for many in the Lincoln administration.

However, immediately following the Lincoln assassination he was called back to Washington and started working on the case.  Within a mere two days all the conspirators except Booth and Herold were in custody. The civilwarbummer article noted: “Within two days, all of the conspirators were in custody. Somehow Baker know exactly where he could find the alcoholic George A. Atzerodt whose nerve had failed him when it came time to kill Vice-President Andrew Johnson. He also knew that Seward’s would-be assassin, Lewis Paine, could be found in the Washington, D.C. boarding house of Mary Surratt.  Colonel Baker knew to arrest Edward Spangler, the carpenter at Ford’s Theater. ..Lafayette Baker had all the answers within forty-eight hours, including the escape route taken by John Wilkes Booth and David Herold.” I find that an amazing amount of detective work to have completed in just two days, and apparently the writer of the article felt the same.

Almost makes you wonder if he didn’t have some kind of advance information about all this.

A group of 25 men, under the command of Lieutenant Edward P. Doherty took out after Booth and Herold, but the overall command of this group ended up being divided between two other men—Baker’s cousin, Luther B. Baker, and Colonel Everton Conger.  The article noted that: “Luther Baker was an enforcer who had carried out several of Lafayette Baker’s dirty deeds. Colonel Everton Conger also worked for Baker’s Intelligence Service  and was willing to go to any lengths for his supervisor.” This group rode straight (no hunting or having to look around) to the farm where Booth and Herold were in a tobacco barn. Herold surrendered but Booth refused, and was subsequently supposedly shot in the back of the head. Conger searched the body of the supposed Booth and came up with, among other things, a leather-bound diary. He had been told by Lafayette Baker to specifically look for the diary. You have to wonder why and you also have to wonder how Baker even knew of its existence.

Conger took the personal effects, diary included, to Baker, who then wanted Conger to go with him when he turned over Booth’s effects to Edwin Stanton. Apparently, Baker wanted two witnesses to the fact that he turned over all of Booth’s effects to Stanton and that Stanton was “the final and only despository of this evidence.” Baker later claimed that someone had “cut out eighteen leaves” from the diary. Stanton claimed he didn’t remove any of the pages. It has been speculated that the missing eighteen pages included the names of those who had financed the “Lincoln conspiracy.”

What happened afterward depends on which sources you believe. One source I read said Baker was called before a  Congressional committee when it was found out that a diary had been taken off Booth’s body. This was when Baker mentioned the eighteen missing pages. Stanton was then called before the committee and said he never removed any pages and Stanton was forced to hand over the diary. Another source I read awhile back said that Stanton had destroyed the written material (evidence) from Booth’s body, that it had, in fact, ended up probably in his fireplace. I supposed whoever might have the diary could disprove that one.

Another blog, for March 6, 2013, gives a little different spin to this. It says: “By 1864, Edwin Stanton was forced to banish Col. Baker to New York City. But Baker, within a year, returned to the forefront via a plot to assassinate Abraham Lincoln, which allegedly ‘was Baker’s bid to recoup his fortunes.  First, elimination of the President, which a large clique in the War Department desired, then a swift ‘solution’ to the crime’ via the subsequent ‘trial’ of patsies Mary Surratt, Louis Paine, Dr. Samuel Mudd, etc.”

Now, fast-forward to the twentieth century. A lot has been written about the Lincoln assassination and its aftermath and needless to say, the historians are, as usual, in wild disagreement with one another, to the point where name calling has almost become a fine art.

Over the years I have read Eisenschiml’s book Why Was Lincoln Murdered?  and I have also read most of his second book In The Shadow of Lincoln’s Death  which I have a copy of. Although some current historians have tried to savage Eisenschiml, he asked a lot of questions that I have never seen satisfactorily answered. I’ve also read Theodore Roscoe’s The Web of Conspiracy  which deals with the assassination. And I’ve read The Lincoln Conspiracy  which is a book that leaned heavily on those written previous to it for information. Another one I have heard of but have not read, one that has been panned by contemporary historians is one by Ray Neff and Leonard Guttridge called Dark Union.  Dr. Neff was an emeritus faculty member of Indiana State University.

A brief biography of Dr. Neff appeared on in which his and Mr. Guttridge’s book, Dark Union, was mentioned. It said: “His and Mr. Guttridge’s conclusion that the assassin Booth had survived and escaped captivity after murdering President Lincoln is controversial and has been largely dismissed by mainstream historians.” All the more reason for some of this to be checked out. After all, it has been “mainstream” historians who have told us that Oswald was the lone assassin of John F. Kennedy, all based on the Warren Commission Report, which even those not versed in any of this have sense enough to realize is balderdash. And then, do you “remember the Maine” the ship the Spanish supposedly blew up that got us into the Spanish-American War. Establishment “history” was a little bit off there, too. And establishment “historians” also told us that Roosevelt did not know about Pearl Harbor before it happened. Several books have now been written that show that this was all so much hogwash. Of course Roosevelt knew. It was his ticket to get us into World War 2 so we could help out his buddies in Red Russia. The “establishment” version of “history” is usually some pat little story that never really happened and is tossed out there so the gullible will be enthralled into never asking any questions about what really did happen.

The fact remains that Edwin Stanton and Lafayette Baker ran a secret police organization in this country during the War of Northern Aggression is something the “historians” need to start looking at rather than denying it and trying to smear those who write about this. You almost have to wonder if the Bolsheviks in 1917 and thereafter used what happened in this country in the 1860s as a pattern for what eventually morphed into the KGB—you know—that “disbanded” organization that really isn’t (quite) disbanded.