fox files

Passing a severe traffic accident on the highway last Friday got to me.

I share this story because this tragic incident got me thinking (again) about the comments I hear regarding the dangers of firearms and carry permit holders. People say they are concerned about everyday people walking around our everyday lives with guns. People are afraid firearms will go off by themselves or that people will suddenly go Wild West (which is not true, but rather Hollyrot created) on everyone (basically any time they get scared or angry) and use their firearms to settle price checks, road rage, rude comments or other random disagreements.

David Hemenway, who led a Harvard University analysis of figures from the National Crime Victimization Survey, alleged that “the average person … has basically no chance in their lifetime ever to use a gun in self-defense. But … every day, they have a chance to use the gun inappropriately.” The responsibly armed detest those comments. We understand that firearms are for self-defense and protection and are a last resort if avoidance and escape are not options.

All that said, I would be more inclined to be concerned about vehicles in the hands of distracted drivers than firearms in the hands of permit holders. Every year, car accidents cause more injuries and deaths than any other type of personal injury incident.

Get ready for this. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), an estimated 5,808,272 car accidents occur every year in the United States. That amounts to nearly 16,000 accidents per day. Additionally, national averages report that 2.35 million people suffer injuries or disabilities annually (that’s 6,438 per day) due to vehicular accidents, and about 37,000 fatalities every year are vehicle-related, which breaks down to more than 100 deaths per day.

In 2016, the NHTSA data showed that:

Drunk-driving deaths (10,497 fatalities) increased by 1.7 per­cent.
Speeding-related deaths (10,111 fatalities) increased by 4 percent.

Unbelted deaths (10,428 fatalities) increased by 4.6 percent.
Motorcyclist deaths (5,286 fatalities — the largest number of motorcyclist fatalities since 2008) increased by 5.1 percent.

Pedestrian deaths (5,987 fatalities — the highest number since 1990) increased by 9 percent.

All in all, this NHTSA data indicates that two out of three motorists will be involved in an injurious accident during their lifetimes. By car insurance industry estimates, you can expect to be involved in an accident once every 10 years. So, once every decade or so, expect to be involved in a traffic crash. With that, there is a 1 in 20 chance that the crash you have will involve a serious injury.

If you have not been in a car accident, consider yourself lucky (or overdue). Just think about how often we are in and around vehicles. Americans typically drive a lot for road trips, vacations, errands, school drop-offs, grocery store visits and work travel. According to data from the U.S. Department of Transportation, the average American driver puts in 13,474 miles behind the wheel each year. And that doesn’t include passenger time!

I may have a firearm with me at all times, but I use it only on the shooting ranges or training classes or at home dry-firing, dry practicing or cleaning it. I certainly do not spend as much daily time using it as I do using my car. With hundreds of thousands of vehicles on the road, the odds of getting into a collision are frighteningly high. Even the most prudent drivers cannot always avoid crashes with reckless people on the roadways. (By the way, it is difficult to calculate, but the estimated number of firearms nationwide is around 500 million, and the number of registered vehicles in 2016 was 268.8 million.)

So many people are afraid of so many things, and they are often quick to assign blame to firearms and firearm owners. But when it comes to driving, no problem! The normalcy and the repetition of using vehicles for transportation makes us comfortable and even complacent with driving. We are all guilty of letting our guards down.

Just something to ponder.

I KEEP CONFIRMING OVER AND OVER AGAIN THAT LIBERALS CAN DISH IT OUT BUT CAN’T TAKE THE REBUFF.

NOTHING, NOT EVEN FRIENDSHIP, COMES BETWEEN THEM AND THEIR BELIEFS.

IN OTHER WORDS, DEALING WITH A LIBERAL IS NO DIFFERENT THAN DEALING WITH A LIE.

It’s been 18 years since that fateful September day when life changed, quite literally, for an entire nation.

With the past anniversary of 9/11, a day that shook this country to the core, I have a simple thought I’d like to share with you:

It is how we respond to an event, not the event itself, that defines us.

Raising Kids With Religion Or Spirituality May Protect Their Mental Health: Study

A new study from Harvard’s T.H. Chan School of Public Health finds that kids and teens who are raised with religious or spiritual practices tend to have better health and mental health as they age. But not to worry if you’re not a service-attender. The research, published last week in the American Journal of Epidemiology, finds that people who prayed or meditated on their own time also reaped similar benefits, including lower risk of substance abuse and depression later on.

The practice of law is a complete hypocritical sham and scam, because everyone in the system belongs to the same club. The DA, your own lawyer and the judge. On top of that, the police departments work WITH the state, so the ENTIRE system is a 100% contradiction and conflict of interests.  PERIOD!

INTELLIGENT PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THAT THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF SOCIALISM IS TO CONTROL THE CITIZENS BY MAKING THE GOVERNMENT LORD AND MASTER OF SOCIETY’S AFFAIRS.

IN OTHER WORDS, A FEW HUNDRED INDIVIDUALS RULE AS SUPERIORS AND NOT AS PUBLIC SERVANTS FOR THE PEOPLES.

Good intentions will always be pleaded for any assumption of power.

The Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions.

There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters.

Sexual assault allegations dating from the 1980’s against Judge Brett Kavanaugh invite an easy conclusion that’s hard to follow – and a hard conclusion that’s easy to follow. Clearly, the issue involves sex, not just sexual assault. Demanding consent for every sexual interaction is easy to endorse; hard to enforce. The harder conclusion involves applying some statute of limitations to accusations. Beyond leaving some innocents unfairly accused, unable to prove their innocence, too many outdated allegations risk making the #MeToo movement seem unfair and unjust.

Prevention is more important than punishment. So far, the discussion has been too mechanistic, as if potential sex partners must wave red or green flags for stop and go. But this sexual abuse epidemic reflects a deeper, unfashionable, truth: the problem here is missing ethics more than misusing power. If everyone followed Hillel, refusing to do that which is hateful to us onto our neighbors, even demeaning wisecracks, despicable pawing, manipulative relationships, would stop.

The post-1960’s hook ups and bed-hopping made matters worse. Without romanticizing the “good old days,” the if-it-feels-good-do-it sexual revolution freed too many (overwhelmingly male) predators to hurt too many (mostly female) victims. Again, the easy part is declaring “Be good.” Living it is harder.

As sexual accusations mount, we must ask: how old an allegation is too old?

Both courts of public opinion and courts of law need statutes of limitations. Kavanaugh’s critics should remember: the test of our commitment to justice doesn’t come when innocent friends are falsely accused, but when guilty – or unpopular – people might be treated unfairly. Juanita Broderick’s rape accusations against Bill Clinton and Karen Monahan’s complaints of “emotional and physical abuse” by Congressman Keith Ellison are more credible than the two hazy, decades-old, alcohol-blurred accusations lodged so far against Judge Kavanaugh. #MeToo cannot just target Republicans while absolving Democrats.

The older accusation, the more authoritative the evidence must be, even regarding sex crimes.

The statute of limitations is a bedrock of Western justice. In 1540, the English Parliament mandated the ancient notion that imposing varying time limits on prosecuting particular crimes guaranteed social order and treated individuals fairly. Over time, evidence deteriorates, the guilty sometimes repent and punishment’s preventative dimension diminishes. Since 1879, America’s Supreme Court has explained that Statutes of Limitations “promote justice by preventing surprises through the revival of claims that have been allowed to slumber until evidence has been lost.” Such rules – “vital to the welfare of society” and “enlightened jurisprudence” – provide “security and stability to human affairs,” because “even wrongdoers are entitled to assume that their sins may be forgotten.”

Philosophically, let’s debate how much time must pass before assuming a now-blameless, one-time criminal has changed enough to make reporting the crimes unfair. In Betraying Spinoza, Rebecca Goldstein identifies the “philosophical dilemmas” stemming from “bodily persistence over time.” Examining a photo of her younger self, Goldstein considers this live stranger she sees who is her: “the very atoms that composed her body, no longer compose mine. And if our bodies are dissimilar, our points of view are even more so.”

The less serious the crime, the shorter the statute of limitations – with no limits for murder. Beyond the law, long-ago cases of sexual predation involving a Bill Cosby or a Harvey Weinstein remain relevant because their behavior continued. But the Kavanaugh claims are murkier and mustier.

Modern politicians, Left and Right, have resisted rivals’ attempts to define them by past sins. Bill Clinton insisted in 1992 that “character is a journey.” Many Democrats eager to win the election then backed him for the next decade, betraying their commitments to believing women in sexual assault cases and to opposing hostile work environments.

Following Clinton, Republicans suddenly appreciated statutes of limitations. George W. Bush dismissed allegations stemming from his partying days by saying, “When I was young and stupid… I was young and stupid.”

Today, Western society has become sensitized to the lifelong damage sexual abuse frequently causes. We remember wrongdoers’ sins because many victims cannot forget the wrong done to them. Israeli law mostly keeps statutes of limitations of five and 10 years, depending on the severity of the crimes. Some American states are considering abolishing the statute of limitations for rape, following California in 2016. Many states now run the clock on recovered memories of sexual abuse from the moment of the restored recollection, not from when the crime occurred. This accommodation parallels the “discovery rule” in fraud cases, which starts the clock once the injury is exposed – or reasonably could have been found.

While respecting every victim’s anguish, the older the attack, the more egregious or systematic a crime should have to be to justify a public airing today. We need some limits, even on this sensitive subject.

Without some boundaries, the fury usually ends up escalating until it undermines the movement’s legitimacy. In the 1950’s, Communists infiltrated American institutions, but the purge surged so aggressively that today most condemn McCarthyism without remembering its original, legitimate, rationale.

This current housecleaning of sexual bullies is long overdue. Our legal tradition must target those most guilty – and those still alive who can defend themselves. Let’s protect the innocent from unfair accusations while protecting the less innocent from stale or unfair charges. Admittedly, such restraint risks shielding some harassers, but it will preserve the credibility of a movement that has more bad apples to expose – and many more despicable habits to reform, through a broader, more thorough moral awakening.

It just occurred to me that many school teachers responding to the idea of arming teachers in order to harden and making a more physical security presence and stance in our school systems, especially in light of the ‘wait outside’ universal condemnation of police policy during the Parkland, Florida shooting have absolutely no idea what they are talking about.

Their response:

“I’d rather take a bullet and die for my students than kill someone”

“In the 1960´s, the elite media invented second-wave feminism as part of the elite agenda to dismantle civilization and create a New World Order.”

Since writing these words last week, I have discovered that before she became a feminist leader, Gloria Steinem worked for the CIA spying on Marxist students in Europe and disrupting their meetings. She became a media darling due to her CIA connections. MS Magazine, which she edited for many years was indirectly funded by the CIA.

Steinem has tried to suppress this information, unearthed in the 1970´s by a radical feminist group called “Red Stockings.” In 1979, Steinem and her powerful CIA-connected friends, Katharine Graham of the Washington Post and Ford Foundation President Franklin Thomas prevented Random House from publishing it in “Feminist Revolution.” Nevertheless the story appeared in the “Village Voice” on May 21, 1979.

Steinem has always pretended that she had been a student radical. “When I was in college, it was the McCarthy era,” she told Susan Mitchell in 1997, “and that made me a Marxist.” (Icons, Saints and Divas: Intimate Conversations with Women who Changed the World 1997. p 130) Her bio-blurb in June 1973 MS. Magazine states: “Gloria Steinem has been a freelance writer all her professional life. Ms magazine is her first full-time salaried job.”

Not true. Raised in an impoverished, dysfunctional family in Toledo Ohio, Steinem somehow managed to attend elite Smith College, Betty Friedan´s alma mater. After graduating in 1955, Steinem received a “Chester Bowles Student Fellowship” to study in India. Curiously, an Internet search reveals that this fellowship has no existence apart from Gloria Steinem. No one else has received it.

In 1958, Steinem was recruited by CIA´s Cord Meyers to direct an “informal group of activists” called the “Independent Research Service.” This was part of Meyer´s “Congress for Cultural Freedom,” which created magazines like “Encounter” and “Partisan Review” to promote a left-liberal chic to oppose Marxism. Steinem, attended Communist-sponsored youth festivals in Europe, published a newspaper, reported on other participants, and helped to provoke riots.

One of Steinem´s CIA colleagues was Clay Felker. In the early 1960´s, he became an editor at Esquire and published articles by Steinem which established her as a leading voice for women´s lib. In 1968, as publisher of New York Magazine, he hired her as a contributing editor, and then editor of Ms. Magazine in 1971. Warner Communications put up almost all the money although it only took 25% of the stock. Ms. Magazine´s first publisher was Elizabeth Forsling Harris, a CIA-connected PR executive who planned John Kennedy´s Dallas motorcade route. Despite its anti establishment image, MS magazine attracted advertising from the crème of corporate America. It published ads for ITT at the same time as women political prisoners in Chile were being tortured by Pinochet, after a coup inspired by the US conglomerate and the CIA.

Steinem´s personal relationships also belie her anti establishment pretensions. She had a nine-year relationship with Stanley Pottinger, a Nixon-Ford assistant attorney general, credited with stalling FBI investigations into the assassinations of Martin Luther King, and the ex-Chilean Foreign Minister Orlando Latelier. In the 1980´s, she dated Henry Kissinger. For more details, see San Francisco researcher Dave Emory.

Our main misconception about the CIA is that it serves US interests. In fact, it has always been the instrument of a dynastic international banking and oil elite (Rothschild, Rockefeller, Morgan) coordinated by the Royal Institute for Internal Affairs in London and their US branch, the Council for Foreign Relations. It was established and peopled by blue bloods from the New York banking establishment and graduates of Yale University´s secret pagan “Skull and Bones” society. Our current President, his father and grandfather fit this profile.

The agenda of this international cabal is to degrade the institutions and values of the United States in order to integrate it into a global state that it will direct through the United Nations. In its 1947 Founding Charter, the CIA is prohibited from engaging in domestic activities. However this has never stopped it from waging a psychological war on the American people. The domestic counterpart of the “Congress for Cultural Freedom” was the “American Committee for Cultural Freedom.” Using foundations as conduits, the CIA controlled intellectual discourse in the 1950´s and 1960´s, and I believe continues to do so today. In The The Cultural Cold War: The CIA and the World of Arts and Letters, Francis Stonor Saunders estimates that a thousand books were produced under the imprint of a variety of commercial and university presses, with covert subsidies.

The CIA´s “Project Mockingbird” involved the direct infiltration of the corporate media, a process that often included direct takeover of major news outlets. “By the early 1950´s,” writes Deborah Davis, in her book Katharine the Great : Katharine Graham and Her Washington Post Empire, the CIA owned respected members of the New York Times, Newsweek, CBS and other communication vehicles, plus stringers, four to six hundred in all.” In 1982 the CIA admitted that reporters on the CIA payroll have acted as case officers to agents in the field. Philip Graham, publisher of the Washington Post, who ran the operation until his “suicide” in 1963, boasted that “you could get a journalist cheaper than a good call girl, for a couple of hundred dollars a month.”

I was born in 1950. Idealists in my parent´s generation were disillusioned when the Communist dream of universal brotherhood turned out to be a shill for a brutal despotism. My own generation may discover that our best instincts have also been manipulated and exploited. There is evidence that the 60´s drug counter culture, the civil rights movement, and anti-war movement, like feminism, were CIA directed. For example, the CIA has admitted setting up the National Student Association as a front in 1947. In the early 1950´s the NSA opposed the attempts of the House Un-American Activities Committee to root out Communist spies. According to Phil Agee Jr., NSA officers participated in the activities of SNCC, the militant civil rights group, and Students for a Democratic Society, a radical peace group.

According to Mark Riebling, the CIA also may have used Timothy Leary. Certainly the agency distributed LSD to Leary and other opinion makers in the 1960’s. Leary made a generation of Americans turn away from active participation in society and seek fulfillment “within.” In another example of the CIA´s use of drugs to interfere in domestic politics, Gary Webb describes how in the 1980´s, the CIA flooded Black ghettos with cocaine.

I won´t attempt to analyze the CIA´s motivation except to suggest what these acts have in common: They demoralized, alienated and divided Americans. The elite operates by fostering division and conflict in the world. Thus, we don´t realize who the real enemy is. For the same reason, the CIA and elite foundations also fund the diversity and multi cultural movements.

Feminism has done the most damage. There is no more fundamental yet delicate relationship in society than male and female. On it depends the family, the red blood cell of society. Nobody with the interests of society at heart would try to divide men and women. Yet the lie that men have exploited women has become the official orthodoxy.

Man loves woman. His first instinct is to nurture (“husband”) and see her thrive. When a woman is happy, she is beautiful. Sure, some men are abusive. But the vast majority have supported and guided their families for millennium.

Feminists relentlessly advance the idea that our inherent male and female characteristics, crucial to our development as human beings, are mere “stereotypes.” This is a vicious calumny on all heterosexuals, 95% of the population. Talk about hate! Yet it is taught to children in elementary schools! It is echoed in the media. Lesbians like Rosie O´Donnell are advanced as role models.

All of this is calculated to create personal confusion and sow chaos among heterosexuals. As a result, millions of American males are emasculated and divorced from their relationship to family (the world and the future.) The American woman has been hoodwinked into investing herself in a mundane career instead of the timeless love of her husband and children. Many women have become temperamentally unfit to be wives and mothers. People, who are isolated and alone, stunted and love-starved, are easy to fool and manipulate. Without the healthy influence of two loving parents, so are their children.

Feminism is a grotesque fraud perpetrated on society by its governing elite. It is designed to weaken the American social and cultural fabric in order to introduce a friendly fascist New World Order. Its advocates are sanctimonious charlatans who have grown rich and powerful from it. They include a whole class of liars and moral cripples who work for the elite in various capacities: government, education and the media. These impostors ought to be exposed and ridiculed.

Women´s oppression is a lie. Sex roles were never as rigid as feminists would have us believe. My mother had a successful business in the 1950´s importing watch straps from Switzerland. When my father´s income increased, she was content to quit and concentrate on the children. Women were free to pursue careers if they wanted to. The difference was that their role as wife and mother was understood, and socially validated, as it should be.

Until Gloria Steinem and the CIA came along.

We’re all living on a tax farm as free range humans.

Think about that.