More than Gun Control

just politicians

Pursuant to a question on one of my emails from a conservative page, where the question was asked, (“Will the GOP cave to Obama’s gun control?”), I answered with more than

gun control, and addressed what I see as a problem with the GOP politicians in Washington that goes beyond gun control.

My answer:

In the issue of the GOP doing anything in congress, such as “caving to Obama Gun Control”, there is no guarantee that the GOP will not continue to shoot themselves in the foot.  The GOP is becoming a political party of soft-core liberalism, with the same nature of politicians that stink up the Democratic Party!  The core platform of the GOP has shifted to progressive big government big spending ideologies that will give us a four base political system.

1). Radical liberalism, (socialist/communist).

2).  Undecided liberal.  3). The uncommitted progressive, (formerly GOP).

And, 4).  The grass root conservative, (free market, constitutionalist, small government, ‘We The People’ Committed Conservative), the latter, (if it is not too late), will save the American Republic and reclaim, by osmosis, the nation that all others want to be like.

It is true that we were not perfect, and was not intended to be, that is just a little part of what made us great, and I really do not think that the United States did not owe an apology to the rest of the world for being the greatest nation in the whole history of the world.  If that makes us elitists then that we are, and that is a good thing!

Even the liberal, ‘most vile’, would have to agree it was the best thing going in the world.  The United States, home of the brave, and land of the free; like it or leave it… land of opportunity for anyone from the four corners of the world, to come, (legally), and through hard work … achieve a dream, their own utopia, for them and their families…

The GOP once stood committed to those ideologies, but from its conception the progressives, (want to be liberal but afraid to commit to anything), has eroded the principals of conservatism, with jellyfish, lying, self absorbed, politicians who have helped the radical liberals move a free and great nation ever-so close the bleak pit of Marxist communism, and a caliphate nation.

Those are the GOP lying naysayers that are pounding Ted Cruz for doing what his people sent him there to do!  There is some there that are young and fresh politicians that are committed to do what they were elected to do, and have guts enough to stand toe to toe with Satan himself and stick to their promises, men of principal and integrity worthy to be representing the people of that sent them there to get a job done!

The rest deny their sleazy state of character, like a castaway adrift in the sea, tossed about like a lump of slime never knowing which way the waves will toss them.  Not belonging, except to a group of like characters who have adapted to a voided state of being, where the means justifies the end, where it is okay to promise one thing and do something else!  Always blaming someone else, calling names, being a puppet to be dangled by a puppeteer and never having enough backbone to do their own dance.

Whatever lie, whatever sleaze they have to crawl into bed with to be reelected and live an elitist lifestyle, while condemning the nation for being elitist, whatever it takes to maintain their status of delusionary power and credibility.  Yet they have the audacity to stand with a crowd of liberal goons and hammer men of integrity like Ted Cruze, Vitter, Paul, and that group of real conservatives!  Politicians such as Pelosi, Reid, McCain, and their enablers with name calling, (witch is okay as long as they are doing it), are trying to be the puppeteers waiting for the applause of Obama and the Marxist administration; should be run out of congress as a disgrace to the Republic of the United States!

All the while, the liberal media, including the misleading “fair and balanced Fox News”, are sitting out to defame men and women of integrity and character!

For me I will remain standing in support of conservatives and the “Tea Party” patriots who continue to fight for our nation!  Let the GOP, as it stands, do what they do best waffle and cave to the insanity that is Washington as it has become!

It is the people who have allowed this to happen, either by progressive design or by conservative apathy, so it is up to the conservative voter to fix it!

Ted Cruz, doing what he did, demonstrated the conservative resolve and hope! And my hat is off to

R.S. Helms.

Inspirational Favorite Bible Verses in Pictures

Darrell Creswell is a blog to follow, God Blesses this man.

Darrell Creswell - A Study of Christian Grace

I enjoy writing my blog and sharing of God’s goodness, grace and mercy. I also enjoy creating the pictures that go along with the blog. I have listed over 50 inspirational Bible verses here in these pictures. I pray they are a blessing.

Philippians 3:13

Philippians 3:13

View original post

Fix The Problem

FIX THE PROBLEM!

 

 

The Washington Naval Yard rampage, is only a day old and my heartfelt prayers for the victims and their families have and are going before the Lord.  My deepest thanks to the multitude of brave young men and women who responded to this senseless tragedy, thank you.

With that said, I would like to address this post as more of an open letter to all the politicians, activist, and especially to Obama and his administration.  FIX THE DAMN PROBLEM!  I do believe that anyone with any brain cells at all can add one plus one equals two, add one more and you have three, and so on.  Nevertheless, it does seem to me that all the anti-gun activists do not have the sense that God blessed the goose with!  However, let me be redundant again and say in the simplest of terms; mental problems are the connecting points, and do not let the liberal psychologist, and psychiatrist make their bid for people’s rights, that ice is getting problematically thin.

People have rights, and I believe those rights have to be protected to the fullest degree.  Someone who is suffering from a mental disorder, or simply going through a mental condition or stress, have those rights and they should not be infringed, but perhaps therein lays the problem.  It is for sure the gun; (weapon) is not the problem.  It is helping those who need it, and locking them away in some institution subject to the abuses and lack of knowledgeable people who experiment more than cure or help the individual is not the answer.  That is the answer of antiquity and has no place in our society.

In the rash of “mass homicides”, there are two factors that stand out; mental problems, and terrorism.  Now notice I never mentioned guns as a prime factor.  It is not the gun, explosive, knife, machete, poisonous gas, baseball bats, or any other weapon that operates on its own, it does take an individual to wield the instrument to cause death, and no one instrument is worse than the other, death is death, just some methods are quicker than others.  Preventing someone from wanting to kill another person should be the primary concern, a single person or as many as that person can kill; in the long run it all adds up to a great number of innocent people getting killed that did not deserve it.

In the incident of “mass murder”, if it be Sandy Hook, Columbine School, Fort Hood, Boston Marathon bombing, 9/11, Gabriel Gifford, (collateral damage), or other workplace homicides; two common denominators stand out.  The perpetrators were either terrorists or mental disorder people.  It is okay, and we are encouraged to report suspicious situations and people, it is even okay for the law enforcement to immediately, intervene to avert the situation.  Nonetheless, it is not okay to profile an emotionally or psychologically disturbed person and report their “strange” or anti-social behavior to authorities for intervention and getting the individual the psychological evaluation and help they may or may not need to avert another killing rampage.  It is not something police will or even, at times and circumstance, can do.

I understand, and support individual rights and snagging someone up and putting them in a facility where they are subject to abuse and experimental therapies by uncaring unqualified people are of antiquity and rightfully banned.  Nonetheless, could it be that the law is over compensating for the past treatment of people subjected to ignorance of dealing with the mentally ill or mentally challenged, and emotionally perplexed individuals who were just trying to cope with what life had dealt them?

Trying not to condemn people with mental health issues, I do believe that we need to fix the problem that liberals try to stay away from, mental health don’t create votes in most part.  The Republicans on the other hand, want to stay away from the issue of mental health, because they don’t want the liberals to call them a name, like being against people who are mentally handicapped or worse.  Nevertheless, something has to be done!  In defense of the mentally handicapped they need intervention at times just because of their problem, the families need help because they do not know what to expect next, but dare not ask for it because of social bullying and labeling and fear of the treatment of antiquity.  Of course they all love their loved ones, and want to protect them the best they can; nevertheless, it is like helping a loved one who is an alcoholic, you can’t unless they want the help.  The laws are in place to protect the individual while intervening; even with patient confidentiality laws, and restrictions.  There is a lot of laws that help the situation, but most people don’t know them or are afraid to use them.

Apparently, it is not hard to put together a psychological profile, one that would be sufficient to have law enforcement petition a judge to have the individual put in a hospital thirty-day evaluation.  Why is it not being carried out?

It is apparent that the government would rather do something to take away our 2nd amendment rights, (that are proven ineffective), not for the protection of the citizens, or as this administration loves to put it, ‘to protect the children’, in order to get votes, the agenda is uncaring about protecting our citizens or they would secure the border; they don’t care about the children or they would abolish abortion.

I just heard on the news that a Louisiana State Trooper saved a distraught woman’s life.  It was reported to law enforcement that a woman was standing on a interstate overpass, when the trooper arrived he talked the woman away from the edge of the overpass and into his patrol car.  During the conversation she admitted, she was going to jump, (reasons were not disclosed), and they put her in a hospital for psychological evaluation; so it can and is being done.  However, she had to say she was thinking about taking her own life, I think the law reads, “Talking about” that they are thinking of doing harm to himself or herself, or another person, before this action can be taken.

Why is the law not expanded to family or close personal friends observing abnormal behavior or crisis conditions such as extreme stress and depression, or any indicator that the person is experiencing a mental crisis?  Most people cannot determine how or if there may be an escalation of the condition; regardless, the individual needs help.

Not saying that all should be slammed into a mental ward at the local hospital, but evaluation by a “qualified” therapist or psychologist to determine if there is a potential of escalating conditions then a judgment can be made if further institutional evaluation is required.  Nonetheless, the individual would be in the system and monitoring can be easily achieved, perhaps resulting in less killing rampages like the Naval Yard.

I am not saying that this idea is the one; however, I am saying that there is a way to get the mental cases of the streets where they can obtain their weapon of choice, and commit carnage on innocent people.

The federal government should lead the way, with laws that open avenues for identifying, evaluating, and treating individuals while protecting individual rights and freedoms.

Gun control laws are not going to fix the problem, and the money spent by the government to campaign for gun registration by the president and liberal law makers, would be better used in finding a way to

fix the damn problem!

R.S. Helms

 

Jihad ? What Jihad ?

Sunni Islam – Shariah and Jihad

 

 

What is happening with Syria?  Is what Obama has done to the United States, actually the possible beginning of World War Three?  It is early on Sunday morning, yes, it is just two minutes after four, although I have been researching material for several days I have not reached a real reason for the United States to become involved in this civil war; other than Obama Saving face and his relationship to the Muslim Brotherhood.

We have two major players in the civil war, Bashar Hafez al-Assad, the President of Syria, and the General Secretary of the Ba’ath Party and regional Secretary of the party’s branch in Syria.  It is the 100,000 or so rebels who seek to ouster the Ba’ath Party and al-Assad from power.

Of that, all are Muslim, with the notable exception of 1% Christian, and 3% Druze,(Hebrew background calling themselves “Monotheists”), nonetheless, the Sunni sect is dominant with 74% of the population.  Shies, (Shi’ah), make up 13% and of that Alawites are the dominant group, although it is made up of several other sects.  The governing Ba’ath Party is Alawites, which are in control of the 74%, who along with Arabia, Turkey, Iran, Qatar, and Russia, with some additional foreigners thrown into the mix as mercenaries.  The Syrian Muslim Brotherhood, (separate group from the Egyptian brotherhood, yet the same), along with al-Qaeda and other Muslim groups are joined by Saudi Arabia in this ouster of al-Assad and his religious and political control.

Both the regime and the opposition forces have the capability and Jihadist values that would allow them, with ease, to gas these people.  If the regime would have been doing the gas murder of all these people, it would have been carried out in another city, like Homs.  The point is, this uprising is only the latest of hundreds since the middle 500 AD.  Moreover, the thing they all have been is religious.  In the Middle East they have been Islam vs. Islam, one sect here and another variation there, all believing in the same central foundation, (pillars), and in general the same thing; but of course, Shari ‘a and the conduct of the various Muslim sub-cultures or tribes and clans of the Middle East and the Western world. 

The Christian faith has more sects, (denominations), and at one time, I would think they were just as violent and brutal as Islam, only as time passed and Christians came more and more under the influence of the Holy Spirit, they have settled down some, a whole lot of some.  Nonetheless, I am not about to make excuses for the history of the Christian church, however, I will say this, at this point in time the Christians have (actually) stopped lobbing heads and burning people at the stake!  Yet over the past 150 years, we have chilled out a good deal. 

Islam on the other hand has become one of the bloodiest violent religions on the planet.  Moreover, it makes no difference who they decide to go to war with, it is a genuine blood bath when it happens.  The current conflict, (power war), is no different than in Lebanon, Egypt, and Iran, protests escalating into war, with the rebels being aided financially and weapons all from foreign nations for the purpose of control, under the guise of “democracy” or so-called freedom from a tyrannical dictatorships.

Caliphate (from the Arabic khilafa, is an Islamic state led by a supreme religious as well as political leader known as a caliph ((meaning literally a successor, i.e., a successor to Islamic prophet Muhammad and all the Prophets of Islam. The term caliphate is often applied to successions of Muslim empires that have existed in the Middle East and Southwest Asia.  Conceptually the caliphate represents the political unity of the entire community of Muslim faithful, the ummah, ruled by a single caliph. In theory, the organization of a caliphate should be a constitutional theocracy (under the Constitution of Medina), which means that the head of state, the Caliph, and other officials are representatives of the people and ofIslam and must govern according to constitutional and religious law(Sharia). In its early days, the first caliphate resembled elements of direct democracy (see shura) and an elective monarchy.[1]

It was initially led by Muhammad’s disciples as a continuation of the leaders and religious system the prophet established, known as the ‘Rashidun caliphates’. A “caliphate” is also a state which implements such a governmental system.

Sunni Islam stipulates that the head of state, the caliph, should be elected by Shura – elected by Muslims or their representatives.[2] Followers of Shia Islam believe the caliph should be an imam chosen by God from the Ahl al-Bayt (Muhammad’s purified progeny). From the end of the Rashidun period until 1924, caliphates, sometimes two at a single time, real and illusory, were ruled by dynasties. The first dynasty was the Umayyad. This was followed by the Abbasid, the Fatimid, and finally the Ottoman Dynasty.

The caliphate was “the core leader concept of Sunni Islam, by the consensus of the Muslim majority in the early centuries”)).  (Credit for the definition is to Wikipedia, the underline score is my own)..

 

 This is where Lebanon, Syria, and Egypt have been experiencing the battle of caliphate and socialism or communism and the so-called (tyrannical or dictatorship), and is the reason for the Imam of the Muslim communities in the United States and the Western World.  It is also the reason for Obama’s support of the Muslim Brotherhood, and the Rebels in the Syrian civil war at present.  Saudi Arabia, who is anti-caliphate, and for a monarchal state, Russia a socialistic state; both support the Syrian regime and al-Assad, along with Turkey, Qatar, Iran, and others.

What our government is not telling us is how we make the end choice, of being socialist or Muslim caliphate.  Alternatively, is it going to be up to the U.N. who will choose the caliphate, because the power will eventually be theirs; but regardless, if the U.S. continues on the path of progressivism, we as a constitutional federalist republic will no longer be free!  We will no longer be guaranteed our freedom and rights under our constitution, but ruled by the U.N. …

Our legal system is based on the constitution, not on sharia or shariah, (both are correct uses), law of the Quran, nonetheless, in order to appease the Imam of the Muslim communities of the U.S. we have federal and local Judges legally considering shariah law in cases concerning Muslims.  One of the things that is yet to be a “pillar” of Islam is Jihad, if you missed it, here it is again … Jihad,

(Jihad (English pronunciation: /ɪˈhɑːd/Arabicجهاد‎ ǧihād [dʒiˈhæːd]), an Islamic term, is a religious duty of Muslims. In Arabic, the word jihad translates as a noun meaning “struggle”. Within the context of the classical Islam, particularly the Shiahs beliefs, it refers to struggle against those who do not believe in Islamic God (Allah).[1] However, the word has even wider implications.

Jihad is commonly used term for “Holy War“, Jihad means “to struggle in the way of Allah”. Jihad appears 41 times in the Quran and frequently in the idiomatic expression “striving in the way of God (al-jihad fi sabil Allah)”.[2][3][4] A person engaged in jihad is called a mujahid; the plural is mujahideen. Jihad is an important religious duty for Muslims. A minority among the Sunni scholars sometimes refer to this duty as the sixth pillar of Islam, though it occupies no such official status.[5] In Twelver Shi’a Islam, however, Jihad is one of the 10 Practices of the Religion.

There are two commonly accepted meanings of jihad: an inner spiritual struggle and an outer physical struggle.[2] The “greater jihad” is the inner struggle by a believer to fulfill his religious duties.[2][6] This non-violent meaning is stressed by both Muslim[7] and non-Muslim[8] authors. However, there is consensus amongst Islamic scholars that the concept of jihad will always include armed struggle against persecution and oppression.[9]

The “lesser jihad” is the physical struggle against the enemies of Islam.[2] This physical struggle can take a violent form or a non-violent form. The proponents of the violent form translate jihad as “holy war”,[10][11] although some Islamic studies scholars disagree.[12] The Dictionary of Islam[2] and British-American orientalist Bernard Lewis both argue jihad has a military meaning in the large majority of cases.[13] Some scholars maintain non-violent ways to struggle against the enemies of Islam. An example of this is written debate, often characterized as “jihad of the pen”.[14]

According to the BBC, a third meaning of jihad is the struggle to build a good society.[6] In a commentary of the hadith Sahih Muslim, entitled al-Minhaj, the medieval Islamic scholar Yahya ibn Sharaf al-Nawawi stated that “one of the collective duties of the community as a whole (fard kifaya) is to lodge a valid protest, to solve problems of religion, to have knowledge of Divine Law, to command what is right and forbid wrong conduct”.)  (Again the Wikipedia definition).

 

 Therefore, we have at least two Muslim ideologies fueling the rebels in Syria, perhaps more, nonetheless, when we consider both players in this war, we do have a root cause of Jihad, however you wish to view it.  Furthermore, it makes no difference how they kill each other, and kill, maim and torture the innocent people of Syria, nor what side of the revolution is guilty of the bloodshed, if the issue is the deaths of the Syrian people why has not the global community put a stop to it before now?  Poisonous gas is only a weapon to them; therefore, if WMD’s is the justification, they need to be destroyed!  In addition, a limited assault is of no use, only provocation, which the U.S. has no right to do under our constitution.  Nevertheless, it should be the responsibility of the U.N. Security Council, which has already rendered its opinion of the issue.

The United States should not be the military or police of the U.N. nor should it be the paid mercenaries of the Muslim Brotherhood and Sunni Islam, by fighting for al-Qaeda and the Taliban.  It is the global consensus, that the U.S. not strike the Syrian government, even with a so-called “limited strike”, as told to us by this administration. It is likewise the overwhelming consensus of congress and the people of the United States that we not be involved in the Syrian civil war, so why is the administration continuing to campaign for an unconstitutional military engagement in Syria? 

The history of this administration’s involvement goes to the “Arab Spring” foreign policy of the Obama administration.  With the grandiose vision of peace to a region that will never be at peace!  Egypt failed, not by putting in democracy; they already had that to an extent, but they voted in the Brotherhood, the imam of Islam and it failed terribly.  The next real involvement was Lebanon, which has not witnessed many days of peace, and then we have Benghazi Embassy attack; we have yet found the real cause for this al-Qaeda aggression.  Fact is most of this continued fighting is due to the various factions of Islam applying shariah and that is a fight that will go on and on and on, until the Sunnis kill through justification of Jihad their opposition, which will simply incorporate world.  It has been going on for over 1700 years.

We missed the opportunity to take out the “huge” stockpile of chemical weapons by not acting quicker with Saddam Hussein; Saddam simply gave or sold them to al-Assad and the Syrian government, but that was G.W. Bush and the democratic congress, and I was a democrat against Bush’s war in Iraq.

The whole issue with this is it all boils down to who is in control of the majority of the world’s oil supply and resources; of course, it is the Middle East and Saudi Arabia.  Naturally, the Muslims find themselves in the midst of that problem, but with Islam’s shariah, which is theological and political so do not look for any separation in the two anytime soon.

If we would develop our own gas and oil resources, build the pipeline, we would only have one problem in the Middle East; that would be getting out of there and stop trying to nation build!   We need to re-build our own nation cut the federal government by two-thirds, secure our boarders, and then limit what we spend in foreign aid, with none to a Muslim country!

What our politicians must do is stop denying Jihad, and learn more about it and the Sunni Islam shariah, do the research and connect the dots.  Stop listening to the rhetoric of “we will hunt down those responsible” which now is “we will hunt down the ones who CARRIED out this monstrous act and have them face justice”.  We need to assign a special prosecutor and go after the politicians here who are responsible, then remove them from office in disgrace!  Benghazi murders are tied directly to Obama and his administration, just as is Brian Terry’s murder tied to Eric Holder and Obama’s gun running policy, it happened to Nixon it should happen to Obama.

Finally, NO SYRIAN STRIKE!

Thanks … R.S. Helms