Gun Control, Lies and Deception

So here we go again..... “Guns Kill People.” No, that statement just shows an ignorance of what guns are. Guns are inanimate objects, “they” can’t kill anybody. “Guns have been used to kill people.” Now that is a true statement and so is this:

“Bombs, poison, knives, swords, axes, hammers, screwdrivers, pencils, baseball bats, 2x4’s, bricks, rocks and cars have all been used to kill people.”

So why is it that whenever someone kills someone with a gun, all the “Elitists”, the “Political Aristocracy” and their “Media Lap Dogs” start running around screaming for more gun restrictions or to just outlaw them all together? Now you notice that they don’t run around screaming for restrictions or to outlaw the other things used to kill people, now do they? The victims of these “instruments of death” are just as dead aren’t they? Oh I know, they always say; “Well you can’t kill a large number of people with these instruments and that is the difference.” Really? Jeffery Dahmer killed 17 young men and boys using common kitchen utensils, hand and power tools… oh and his teeth. Ted Bundy killed 30 young women and girls and he never used a gun. John Wayne Gacy killed at least 33 boys and young men and never shot any of them. “Okay”, they say “but you can’t terrorize large groups of people like you can with a gun.” Oh really? How many young women walked to their cars after work terrified that the unknown killer was lurking in their parking lot just waiting to grab them and make them his next victim? How many Chicago parents made frantic calls when their young son didn’t return home at the expected time? Terrified that he was going to be one of those “missing boys” during the terror reign of John Wayne Gacy? Terror can be inflicted on large groups of people in many ways. An anonymous phone call to a building full of people claiming that there’s a bomb in the building and telling them that they have 3 minutes to get out or die I guarantee will cause terror in the hearts of every person in that building until they are out the doors and several hundred feet away.

Speaking of bombs; let’s remember the bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Downtown Oklahoma City on April 19, 1995. The Oklahoma blast claimed 168 lives, including 19 children and injured more than 680 people. No gun was involved. The bombers used 5,000 pounds of ammonium nitrate fertilizer as the main component of their weapon.

And how about September 11, 2001, the 19 terrorists used box-cutters and airplanes to kill nearly 3,000 Americans. Again, no guns were involved.

So I ask again,,, why is it that they go after guns with such vehemence? Why??? What is it about guns in the hands of everyday citizens that terrifies the “Elitists”, the “Political Aristocracy” and their “Media Lap Dogs” ?

To answer that question, let’s do a little review of the history of weapons and guns.

Back in ancient times the biggest strongest man with a club could impose his will over other men and women through fear of pain and death.

Now let’s skip forward to the era of the gentlemen’s duel. A dispute between two men would be settled by a formal duel between the two. One man, the offended party, would “demand satisfaction” challenging the other to a duel. Now the challenged individual could choose between swords or pistols. Now say you were the one being challenged and you weren’t as physically fit or as quick with a blade as your opponent, but you had a good eye and steady hand. You of course would choose pistols over swords to even the odds with your challenger.

Now let’s skip ahead again to the days of the wild west. Colt Arms had developed the revolver or “6 Shooter” as it was called. The nick name for this gun was “The Peacemaker”. Why was it called that? Because virtually every man carried one on his hip and you had better be respectful of that other guy because he just may be faster on the draw than you. And if you robbed the local bank, you would have to face an army of armed townsmen as you tried to make your escape. It just made more sense to the majority of people to go about business with each other in a “peaceful” manner.

Now let’s skip ahead again, this time to the present. Did you know that the safest town in the US is an Atlanta suburb, Kennesaw, GA? Do you know why it is the safest town in the US? And did you know that the year after they passed 1 simple law, the crime rate dropped? Well it was 1982 and the Kennesaw City Council unanimously passed a law requiring adult heads of households to own at least one firearm with ammunition. The ordinance states the gun law is needed to; “protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants.”

Then-councilman J.O. Stephenson said that after the ordinance was passed everyone “went crazy.” “People all over the country said there would be shootings in the street and violence in homes”, he said; “of course, that wasn’t the case.” In fact, according to Stephenson, it caused the crime rate in the city to plunge. Kennesaw Historical Society President Robert Jones said that following the law’s passage, the crime rate DROPPED 89% in the city, compared to the modest 10% drop statewide.

So what have we learned from our history review ?

1. Almost anything can be used as a murder or terror weapon.

2. Bombs are far more effective as killing weapons than guns.

3. Communities that have high gun ownership have lower crime rates than those who restrict gun ownership. Or to put it another way:

“Gun control? It's the best thing you can do for crooks and gangsters. I want you to have nothing. If I'm a bad guy, I'm always gonna have a gun.”

― Sammy "the Bull" Gravano

4. Guns are equalizers. With the invention of the gun, it no longer mattered if you were man or woman, small and weak, old and crippled. If you could hold, aim and pull the trigger of a gun, you were the equal of any bigger, stronger, younger assailant intent on harming you or your loved ones.

Now that you have some more information, it’s time to THINK again. Who do these “Elitists” want to limit access of guns for? Well, the “common” people of course. I emphasized common people because you KNOW they don’t want to take them away from everybody, just everyday Joe & Jane American. That’s right; they don’t want you to have them. Why ???  

I will explain that in Part 2.
 

I am Whamm, I have spoken, may those with wisdom hear and be empowered in their fight to remain free.

Gun Control Part 2

Why do the "Elitists" among us want to take guns away from everyday Joe & Jane American?  We know it's not to make life "safer" for us; we have proven that's a lie.  No, the political and social elite among us don't really care about our safety.  They only care about themselves.  The politicians will have their armed Secret Service agents and police forces.  And the social elitists, like Rosie O'Donnell who rants about gun control while walking around with an armed body guard, oh yeah, they will be protected.  So why the double standard?  Well it's simple, it's because they are the "important" people.  Don't you understand?  They think of their lives as so much more significant than yours or mine, that they MUST be protected.  But as for you and me, well we being armed is just a danger to them and their ability to keep us in "our place" ... under their thumb.  This is nothing new.  It has been that way since the beginning of time.  The powerful want to keep power and so they reserve the tools of power for themselves.

You see, the "Elitists" will always be among us.  History is full of them and the horrors they have inflicted upon their fellow man.  The British Monarchy and the evils of the "Class System" was something our founding fathers understood all too well.  They understood that you need an armed citizenry (Militia) to keep the "Elitists" (those who would wish to subjugate everyone else) in check.  That's the reason for the Second Amendment to the Constitution:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a Free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

The Founders new that for us to preserve the "Rights and Freedoms", that they believed were "God given" and that they had codified in the Constitution, we would need the ability to resist those who would wish to place themselves above us and strip us of those rights.  They believed in a small standing army and an armed citizenry to back it up when necessary but also to resist its misuse by a truculent political class.   These men understood the dangers of the "Elitists" having all the power.  Little by little, they would take all our "Rights and Freedoms" for themselves and we would be back to the status of mere serfs, used for their bidding with NO HOPE for us or our children to ever raise our status.

Our "Right" to bear arms must NEVER be surrendered.  It is what gives us the power to defend ourselves and the rest of our God given Rights from tyranny.  

Now I know some of you will say; "Okay, but it the government uses the army against us, we wouldn't stand a chance, so what good would it do, even if every adult man and woman in the country owned a gun, we would still lose."  Okay, let me answer that by quoting Isoroku Yamamoto, Fleet Admiral and Commander-in-Chief of the Imperial Japanese Navy during World War II:

"Japan would never invade the United States.  We would find a rifle behind every blade of grass."
You see, Yamamoto knew that the majority of Americans owned guns at that time and they would use them to defend their Homeland.  He knew the fearless tenacity of the American warrior he was facing every day.  He had even remarked how they often "sacrificed themselves like Samurai".  He understood that even an army of 500 thousand, who would be ordered to attack an army of say 80 MILLION armed citizens, would be given great pause.

So, that army our government would try to use against us would also be made up of fellow Americans who would be very reluctant to fire on their fellow citizens.  This is why Fascists and Communists use constabulary police forces loyal only to them to control the citizenry and why they institute "Gun Control" early in their takeover of a country.  Let's let a couple of communists tell us in their own words why this is so important:

"Ideas are far more powerful than guns.  We don't let our people have guns.  Why should we let them have ideas?"
                                             - Joseph Stalin

"One man with a gun can control 100 without one."
                                             - Vladimir Lenin

So, when Barack Obama said; "We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set.  We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, that's just as well funded",  a chill ran down my spine.  Oh, you didn't hear him say that?  Here, go listen for yourself: https://youtu.be/L3YG7k25sFM  


Here is what happens when you let the Elitists take the guns away from you:

1911 - Turkey disarmed its citizens, and between 1915  & 1917 they murdered 1.5 million Armenians.

1929 - Russia disarmed its citizens, and between 1929 & 1953 they murdered 20 million Russians.

1935 - China disarmed its citizens, and between 1948 & 1952 they murdered at least 20 million Chinese.

1938 - Germany disarmed its citizens, and between 1939 & 1945 they murdered 16 million people. 

1956 - Cambodia disarmed its citizens, and between 1975 & 1977 they murdered 1 million people.

1964 - Guatemala disarmed its citizens, and between 1964 & 1981 they murdered 100,000 Mayan Indians.

1970 - Uganda disarmed its citizens, and between 1971 & 1979 they murdered 300,000 Christians.

The excuse given by the authorities that they need to take guns away from the citizens in order to lower crime rates is not supported by the facts.  Every time you disarm the citizens you make it too easy for the power-mad to use police forces and military to silence those who oppose their seizure of more and more power.

So, have I got you to think???  Knowing what you know now ... do you think letting the government control all the guns is a good idea?

I am Whamm, may those with wisdom hear the truth and be empowered in their fight to remain free.

 

The Lies and Deception of National Healthcare

The Patient Protection & Affordable Care Act, AKA; "Obamacare." 
What's the real reason for Obamacare? Is it really to provide care to those few million people who can't get insurance due to a preexisting health condition? Or for those who just can’t afford it? Or is it for "the children"? NO, those are just the sales pitches designed to make you feel bad for all those people who are being "denied" their "rights" and to make you believe that this government program is going to make healthcare MORE AFFORDABLE for EVERYONE. Those promises are ALL LIES. It's even called the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA). That sounds like it's going to be good for you, right??? WRONG! It has nothing to do with making Health Insurance “Affordable” or “Protecting Patients.” Here is what this is REALLY all about, it’s about Cost Containment, plain and simple.  
 

Back in 1989, the Federal Government commissioned a study, a study on the rise in the cost of Medicaid spending due to nursing home costs.  People were spending through their own assets paying for nursing homes because Medicare and Medicare Supplements don't cover Custodial Care (non-medically necessary care).   This is the type of care most people need toward the latter years of their lives.  As people reach their 70s, 80s, and 90s, things, as my grandmother used to say, just wear out.  They need help with what is called the "Activities of Daily Living"  (dressing, bathing, toileting, transferring, etc.) Or they need round the clock supervision due to Alzheimer’s, Dementia or another cognitive disease.   Now when people run through their own assets and are no longer able to pay for this type of care from their personal savings,  they end up going on to what is called Medicaid.  

Medicaid is a joint Federal and State program that pays for care for those who can't afford to pay for their own care.  Well back in 1989,  the study the Feds had commissioned said that statistically, 1 out of every 3 men and 1 out of every 2 women would end up needing care in a nursing facility sometime between the age of 65 and mortality. The study also said that the average stay in the facility would be 2.5 to 3 years, and that the average cost (at that time) would be $3,000 per month and that on average the person entering the facility would run through their assets and qualify for Medicaid within 3 to 4 months of entering the facility.  This meant that Medicaid would be on the hook for somewhere between $81,000 and $99,000 per patient.   The average stay in a nursing facility is now between 3 and 4 years, and in 2017 the average cost of a semi-private room in a nursing home in the U.S. is over $6,235 a month, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.  A private room in a nursing home averages $6,965.  Medicaid pays about 70% of the retail cost.  So, the average price the Feds must pay for the average patient for the average stay in a semi-private room is now between $144,028 and $209,496. 

Soon the Feds determined (based on the HUGE numbers of "Baby Boomers," who would be going on to the Medicaid expense rolls when they reached their 80's) that by 2030 the vast majority of money coming into the Treasury would be going out in care costs for Medicaid and Medicare recipients.  President Obama even referred to this stat in a speech he did back in 2009 when first proposing his plan, he said " . . . Medicare and Medicaid expenditures are on a collision course with the revenue stream”, In other words; UNSUSTAINABLE EXPENSE GROWTH.  

Well, that just can't be allowed to happen so what does the Government have to do to control those costs???  How do you keep all those "Baby Boomers" (10,400 per day turning 65 right now) from going onto the Medicaid rolls???  Simple, you must put everyone under one system where they (the government) controls who gets life-extending care and who doesn't. That is why they wanted to pass a "Single Payer" system that would be completely controlled by the Federal Government (just like Medicare), but there wasn't enough support for that, so they went with the PPACA plan, to begin with. I say to "begin with" because "Single Payer" is their ultimate goal.  

Why do you think that Obamacare is so messed up?  Why can't people figure out how to get into a plan?  And if they do get into one, why is it usually more expensive (unless they are getting a subsidy) than their old plan?  Why are they being forced into higher Deductibles, higher Stop Losses and why do the premiums keep rising at an astronomical rate?  Why???  It's intentional, they want to make you so mad at the system that you DEMAND they change it, and what will they offer to fix it ??? Why "Single Payer" of course.  Which is TOTAL CONTROL.  Why do they want total control of who gets life-extending care and who doesn't?   Think about it, let's say you're 75 years old and have a significant health issue. Now if you don't get that Bypass Surgery or that Liver Transplant or that Cancer Treatment, the chances that you'll live long enough to need Long-Term Nursing Care, at the average cost of $209,496, are dramatically reduced, aren't they???   

My grandfather is a perfect example of why the government wants total control of your health care.  He needed quadruple bypass surgery at the age of 76.  He got that surgery and lived to be 86.  He spent the last 6 months of his life in a nursing facility; fortunately he was covered by Nursing Home Insurance which covered the cost.  Now think for a minute, if my grandfather hadn’t received that bypass surgery, he wouldn’t have lived more than 6-12 months and guess what, the government wouldn’t have had to pay him Social Security and Medicare expenses for 10 years.  So, can you think of any reason for the government to have approved his quadruple bypass surgery if they would have had the power to deny it???

Understand this:  THIS HEALTH CARE PROGRAM IS NOT ABOUT PROVIDING MORE PEOPLE WITH BETTER CARE... IT'S COST CONTAINMENT, IT'S ABOUT GETTING RID OF PEOPLE WHO WOULD BE A DRAIN ON THE SYSTEM.  THEY ONLY WANT TO PROVIDE CARE FOR THOSE WHO WILL BE CONTRIBUTING TAX DOLLARS TO THE TREASURY.  IF YOU'RE ON SOCIAL SECURITY, BORN HANDICAPPED OR BECOME DISABLED, YOU ARE A DRAIN ON THE SYSTEM AND THE SOONER YOU DIE, THE BETTER.  

Now if you're thinking:  "Oh they would never do that," ask yourself this question:  If I am no longer able to be a productive taxpayer and to keep me alive is going to cost a lot of tax dollars...   what is the Government's incentive to keep me alive?  Well ??? Can't think of anything, can you? Well neither can they, that’s why there is a “Death Panel” in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. What? You didn’t see it buried in the 2,500 pages of the bill? OH, it’s there, and it is called the Independent Payment Advisory Board or IPAB. The Board is a 15-member panel of unelected federal employees; its members to be appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. The law does not require the IPAB to be bi-partisan in structure, as is required for almost all other “independent” agencies. Its mission is precisely to restrict payments to doctors and hospitals through pricing regulations.  This is especially true for Seniors.  See Section 3022 of the PPACA.

Now, let me ask you something.  How many of the younger generation, who have been indoctrinated to believe that aborting a baby is ok because it would be a “hardship” on the mother, will not conclude that being forced to pay EXCESSIVE TAXES to keep you alive is a “hardship” on them and that YOU should be aborted?  Well ??  Are you thinking now ??? Also, notice that the Congress, the Executive Branch, and Federal Government employees are not going to be part of this plan... oh no, they have a much, much better plan.  WAKE UP.   This Elitist Political Class now thinks of themselves as being so far above us; that they should now decide who lives, and who dies . . .  for the good of “The State" of course.   Welcome to the brave new world "Comrade."  I am Whamm, may those with wisdom hear. 

Evil ... Does it Exist?

          When asked about the existence of evil, Einstein answered as follows:

“Evil, does it exist? Does cold exist? In fact, cold does not exist.  According to the laws of physics, what we consider cold is in reality, the absence of heat.

Does darkness exist?  Darkness does not exist either.   Darkness is in reality, the absence of light.  Light we can study, but not darkness.

Evil does not exist.  It is just like darkness and cold.  God did not create evil.  Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God’s love present in his heart."

-Albert Einstein  

          Understand this; if you are not in tune with the Spirit of God, through love, humility and repentance, then you are in tune with the Satanic Spirit and it will lead you to embrace evil.  Remember what I told you earlier about what Einstein said, that evil is what exists when a person’s heart is not filled with God’s love.   Or as Jesus said: 

 “He that is not with me is against me; …”

-          Matthew 12:30

A very interesting statement.  Notice that Jesus gave no middle ground.  You are either with him or against him.  The fact is that there are two predominate Spirits that roam the earth and knock at the door to the heart of each person.  We decide to which Spirit we will open the door.  This act is the exercise of our free will, which has been granted to us by God himself.

Satan twists people’s understanding of the true will and nature of God to advance his own evil plans for mankind.  He is the supreme spirit of evil, the enemy of God and mankind. The common element that defines him no matter the name attributed to him is this; he demands the sacrifice of sins against God or the sacrifice of human blood in worship to gain his favor.    When I hear a news report of a terrorist attack where the attackers were shouting that they were doing it for their god ... I think; Really?  For your god?  What god needs some flawed, frail little human to kill people for him?  What's his problem, is his arm too short?

The real God, God Almighty, the God described in the Bible is ALL POWERFUL.  This fact is self-evident; He created the universe and everything in it.  Why then would anyone believe that this all-powerful God would need anyone to do anything for him?   Who calls their god “all powerful” but then thinks that their god can't control or destroy any person or group of people who offend him without their help?   That is the epitome of arrogance and that is a trait of Satan and his followers.

Only an impotent, phony god needs someone to kill people for him.   A phony little pretender to the throne, like Satan.   He needs the weak minded to sacrifice themselves and other people to him.   These pathetic puppets are serving Satan’s agenda when they attack and kill other humans, not the TRUE God.   Having spent years as a servant of Satan, I know of what I speak.  I am tired of watching these deluded souls being Satan’s pawns.  So, here’s a clue for those who are falling for this Satanic deception; THE REAL GOD’S ARM IS NOT TOO SHORT, He doesn’t need you to fight His battles.   WAKE UP!