Copied from a friend. I find this information
fascinating. Answered some of my science questions.
“Last week I must have been asked 20 times about the new
COVID vaccines. Here are my thoughts. Please pass this
information on to as many as you can. People need to be
truly informed when it comes to injecting foreign,
genetic material into their bodies.
1. The COVID vaccines are mRNA vaccines. mRNA vaccines
are a completely new type of vaccine. No mRNA vaccine
has ever been licensed for human use before. In essence,
we have absolutely no idea what to expect from this
vaccine. We have no idea if it will be effective or
safe.
2. Traditional vaccine simply introduce pieces of a
virus to stimulate an immune reaction. The new mRNA
vaccine is completely different. It actually injects (transfects)
molecules of synthetic genetic material from non-humans
sources into our cells. Once in the cells, the genetic
material interacts with our transfer RNA (tRNA) to make
a foreign protein that supposedly teaches the body to
destroy the virus being coded for. Note that these newly
created proteins are not regulated by our own DNA, and
are thus completely foreign to our cells. What they are
fully capable of doing is unknown.
3. The mRNA molecule is vulnerable to destruction. So,
in order to protect the fragile mRNA strands while they
are being inserted into our DNA they are coated with
PEGylated lipid nanoparticles. This coating hides the
mRNA from our immune system which ordinarily would kill
any foreign material injected into the body. PEGylated
lipid nanoparticles have been used in several different
drugs for years. Because of their effect on immune
system balance, several studies have shown them to
induce allergies and autoimmune diseases. Additionally,
PEGylated lipid nanoparticles have been shown to trigger
their own immune reactions, and to cause damage to the
liver.
4. These new vaccines are additionally contaminated with
aluminum, mercury, and possibly formaldehyde. The
manufacturers have not yet disclosed what other toxins
they contain.
5. Since viruses mutate frequently, the chance of any
vaccine working for more than a year is unlikely. That
is why the flu vaccine changes every year. Last year’s
vaccine is no more valuable than last year’s newspaper.
6. Absolutely no long term safety studies will have been
done to ensure that any of these vaccines don’t cause
the cancer, seizures, heart disease, allergies, and
autoimmune diseases seen with other vaccines. If you
ever wanted to be guinea pig for Big Pharma, now is your
golden opportunity.
7. Many experts question whether the mRNA technology is
ready for prime time. In November 2020, Dr. Peter Jay
Hotez said of the new mRNA vaccines, "I worry about
innovation at the expense of practicality because they
[the mRNA vaccines] are weighted toward technology
platforms that have never made it to licensure before.”
Dr. Hotez is Professor of Pediatrics and Molecular
Virology & Microbiology at Baylor College of Medicine,
where he is also Director of the Texas Children’s
Hospital Center for Vaccine Development.
8. Michal Linial, PhD is a Professor of Biochemistry.
Because of her research and forecasts on COVID-19, Dr.
Linial has been widely quoted in the media. She recently
stated, "I won't be taking it [the mRNA vaccine]
immediately – probably not for at least the coming year.
We have to wait and see whether it really works. We will
have a safety profile for only a certain number of
months, so if there is a long-term effect after two
years, we cannot know."
9. In November 2020, The Washington Post reported on
hesitancy among healthcare professionals in the United
States to the mRNA vaccines, citing surveys which
reported that: "some did not want to be in the first
round, so they could wait and see if there are potential
side effects", and that "doctors and nurses want more
data before championing vaccines to end the pandemic".
10. Since the death rate from COVID resumed to the
normal flu death rate way back in early September, the
pandemic has been over since then. There fore, at this
point in time no vaccine is needed. The current scare
tactics regarding “escalating cases” is based on a PCR
test that because it exceeds 34 amplifications has a
100% false positive rate unless it is performed between
the 3rd and 5th day after the first day of symptoms. It
is there for 100% inaccurate in people with no symptoms.
This is well established in the scientific literature.
See the attachment (False Positive PCR testing is up to
100%!) for more information on this. If you go to the
CDC site (file:///C:/Users/docto/AppData/Local/Temp/cdc_97230_DS1.pdf
), you can see that the weekly death rates in the US are
now lower than they normally are during an average flu
season.
11. The other reason you don’t need a vaccine for
COVID-19 is that substantial herd immunity has already
taken place in the United States. This is the primary
reason for the end of the pandemic.
12. Unfortunately, you cannot completely trust what you
hear from the media. They have consistently got it wrong
for the past year. Since they are all supported by Big
Pharma and the other entities selling the COVID
vaccines, they are not going to be fully forthcoming
when it comes to mRNA vaccines. Every statement I have
made here is fully backed by published scientific
references.
13. I would be very interested to see verification that
Bill and Melinda Gates with their entire family
including grandchildren, Joe Biden and President Trump
and their entire families, and Anthony Fauci and his
entire family all get the vaccine.
14. Anyone who after reading all this still wants to get
injected with the mRNA vaccine, should at the very least
have their blood checked for COVID-19 antibodies. There
is no need for a vaccine in persons already naturally
immunized.
Here's my bottom line: I would much rather get a COVID
infection than get a COVID vaccine. That would be safer
and more effective. I have had a number of COVID
positive flu cases this year. Some were old and had
health concerns. Every single one has done really well
with natural therapies including ozone therapy and IV
vitamin C. Just because modern medicine has no effective
treatment for viral infections, doesn’t mean that there
isn’t one.
Yours Always,
Frank Shallenberger, MD, HMD
Rights vs. Privilege
We all talk about our rights
and regaining our Constitutional rights, but are they
rights or privileges that we are after? Do you know the
difference?
Our rights are protected by
the Constitution, but most people are not party to the
Constitution. Most people have signed away their rights
by contract with Social Security and the Buck Act.
Because of this, we cannot fight for our rights in
court. (“No private person has a right to complain by suit in court
on the ground of a breach of the United States
constitution; for, though the constitution is a compact,
he is not a party to it” ~ Padelford, Fay & Co. v.
Mayor and Aldermen of City of Savannah 14 Ga. 438, 1854
WL 1492 (Ga., Jan Term 1854) (NO. 64))
Rights are given to us by
God, and cannot be taken away by man (except by
contract). What we believe are rights that we are
currently enjoying are actually privileges granted to us
by government through contracts like our driver’s
license, gun permits, fishing license, passport, etc.
The difference is that rights
cannot be taken away but privileges can. The government
has the ability to take away the privileges that they
granted unto us at any time for any reason. Our God
given rights as defined in and protected by the
Constitution cannot ever be taken away. They are
inherent.
Now that you have this
information, what can you do with it? MRO’s across the
country, including Washington State, have been using the
government’s playing field with little success. The
government makes the rules and the politicians provide
lip service for the majority of issues. How many times
does a bill have to be brought forth before it can be
voted upon? Most of these bills are written to regain
our rights that have been converted into privileges by
government and then taken away from us. Here in
Washington State there are bills that have majority
support but are never heard because one single hearing
committee chair refuses to allow it to be heard. How is
this representing the people?
Now there are some tools
available to force our “representatives” (both House and
Senate) to not only hear our issues, but to act on our
behalf and push the bills through. We need to get tough
and use these tools. They are found in the Constitution,
the Bill of Rights, and Black’s Law.
Remember, freedom does not
come cheap, but whatever it costs, it’s worth it.
IF
YOU DON’T KNOW YOUR RIGHTS – YOU DON’T HAVE ANY!
IF
YOU DON’T DEFEND YOUR RIGHTS – YOU DON’T HAVE ANY!
Here’s
the Truth:
1. You Were Born Sovereign with GOD-Given and
Constitutionally Protected Rights!
2.
Rights Are Unalienable (Un-a-lein-able) Meaning
You Cannot Be Charged, Or Penalized for Using Them!
3.
The Lawful Constitution for the United States and of
each State is the Supreme Law of the Land!
4.
Most People Have Exchanged Their GOD-Given Rights For
Privileges Thru Deceptive Contracts!
5.
Codes, Regulations, Statutes and Acts Are Not The Law
Unless You Have Entered Into A Contract!
6.
A Contract Remains Valid Until Lawfully Challenged –
Silence Is Acceptance and Is Acquiescence!
7.
This Contract Was Executed Through Deception and Without
Full Disclosure to All of The Parties!
8.
The Contract Can Be Broken and Your GOD-Given and
Constitutionally Protected Rights Restored!
9.
The Foregoing Will Mean Absolutely Nothing To You Until
YOU Decide To Look Into It Further!
It
is Amazing how many people will tell you how corrupt the
government is and yet will not believe this!
Check it out for yourself at
http://sovereignproject.com
A
far-reaching anti-choice bill, introduced by
Republican Chris Smith and supported by 173
members
of the House, includes a provision that could redefine rape and set
women's rights back by decades.1
Right now,
federal dollars can't be used for abortion
except in cases of rape, incest,
or when the woman's life is in danger.
But according
to the New York
Times, the Smith bill would narrow that
use to "cases of 'forcible' rape
but not statutory or coerced rape."2 This could mean cases
where women are "drugged or given excessive
amounts
of alcohol, rapes of women with limited mental capacity, and many date
rapes" would no longer count as rape.3
As far too
many women know, bruises and broken bones do not
define rape—a lack of consent does. The Smith bill is scary. And with
173 supporters it already has a frightening
chance of passage
unless the public speaks up right away with an outcry that can't be
ignored.
The petition
says: "Bruises
and broken bones do not define rape—a lack of
consent does.
Stand up and oppose the dangerous GOP legislation to redefine rape."
Federal funds
are already severely restricted when it comes to
reproductive rights and women's health care,
a situation that ends up hurting lower-income women in particular, who
tend to use federally-funded services more
often than wealthy women. The last thing we ought to be doing is
legislating to make these laws more stringent.
In addition,
the Smith bill is full of dangerous anti-choice
provisions as well as the rape redefinition.
Called "Stupak on Steroids" by NARAL Pro-Choice America in reference to
Rep. Bart Stupak's failed attempt to
push stringent restrictions on insurance coverage for abortion during the
health care debate, it would "force millions
of American families to pay more taxes if their health plan covers
abortion care,
jeopardizing abortion coverage in the private market."4
The Smith bill
is just the first of many attacks on women's
rights to come in the new GOP-controlled House.5 If it moves forward, it would set an
incredibly dangerous precedent for GOP action in
the
House for the next two years.
Can you
sign the petition asking Congress to denounce
the Smith bill to redefine rape? Click here:
Want to
support our work? We're entirely funded
by our 5 million members—no corporate
contributions,
no big checks from CEOs. And our tiny staff ensures that small
contributions go a long way.
Chip in here.
RED FRIDAYS ----- Very soon, you will see a great many people wearing
Red every Friday. The reason? Americans who support our troops used
to be called the "silent majority". We are no longer silent, and are
voicing our love for God, country and home in record breaking
numbers. We are not organized, boisterous or over-bearing. We get no
liberal media coverage on TV, to reflect our message or our opinions.
Many Americans, like you, me and all our friends, simply want to
recognize that the vast majority of America supports our troops. Our
idea of showing solidarity and support for our troops with dignity
and respect starts this Friday -and continues each and every Friday
until the troops all come home, sending a deafening message that..
Every red-blooded American who supports our men and women afar will
wear something red.
By word of mouth, press, TV -- let's make the United States on every
Friday a sea of red much like a homecoming football game in the
bleachers. If every one of us who loves this country will share this
with acquaintances, co-workers, friends, and family. It will not be
long before the USA is covered in RED and it will let our troops know
the once "silent" majority is on their side more than ever, certainly
more than the media lets on.
The first thing a soldier says when asked "What can we do to make
things better for you?" is...We need your support and your prayers.
Let's get the word out and lead with class and dignity, by example;
and wear some thing red every Friday.
Submitted to (BFB) By: Mark Spry
Posted By Dragoni: 01/16/2006
THE SOLDIERS DAUGHTER
Last week I was in Atlanta, Georgia attending a conference. While I was in
the airport, returning home, I heard several people behind me beginning to
clap and cheer. I immediately turned around and witnessed one of the
greatest act's of patriotism I have ever seen.
Moving thru the terminal was a group of soldiers in their camo's, as they
began heading to their gate everyone (well almost everyone) was abruptly
to their feet with their hands waving and cheering. When I saw the
soldiers, probably 30-40 of them, being applauded and cheered for it hit
me. I'm not alone. I'm not the only red blooded American who still loves
this country and supports our troops and their families.
Of course I immediately stopped and began clapping for these young unsung
heroes who are putting their lives on the line everyday for us so we can
go to school, work and home without fear or reprisal. Just when I thought
I
could not be more proud of my country or of our service men and women a
young girl, not more than 6 or 7 years old, ran up to one of the male
soldiers. He kneeled down and said "hi," the little girl then she asked him
if he would give something to her daddy for her. The young soldier, he
didn't look any older than maybe 22 himself, said he would try and what did
she want to give to her daddy. Then suddenly the little girl grabbed the
neck of this soldier, gave him the biggest hug she could muster and then
kissed him on the cheek.
The mother of the little girl, who said her daughters name was Courtney,
told the young soldier that her husband was a Marine and had been in
Iraq
for 11 months now. As the mom was explaining how much her daughter,
Courtney, missed her father, the young soldier began to tear up. When this
temporarily single mom was done explaining her situation, all of the
soldiers huddled together for a brief second. Then one of the other
servicemen pulled out a military looking walkie-talkie. They started
playing with the device and talking back and forth on it.
After about 10-15 seconds of this, the young soldier walked back over to
Courtney, bent down and said this to her, "I spoke to your daddy and he
told me to give this to you." He then hugged this little girl that he had
just met and gave her a kiss on the cheek. He finished by saying "your
daddy told me to tell you that he loves you more than anything and he is
coming home very soon."
The mom at this point was crying almost uncontrollably and as the young
soldier stood to his feet he saluted Courtney and her mom. I was
standing
no more than 6 feet away from this entire event unfolded. As the soldiers
began to leave, heading towards their gate, people resumed their applause.
As I stood there applauding and looked around, their were very few dry
eyes, including my own. That young soldier in one last act of selflessness,
turned around and blew a kiss to Courtney with a tear rolling down his cheek.
We need to remember everyday all of our soldiers and their families and
thank God for them and their sacrifices. At the end of the day, it's
good
to be an American.
Red Friday - Just keeping you "in the loop" so you'll know what's going on
in case this takes off.
RED FRIDAYS ----- Very soon, you will see a great many people wearing Red
every Friday. The reason? Americans who support our troops used to be
called the "silent majority". We are no longer silent, and are voicing our
love for God, country and home in record breaking numbers. We are not
organized, boisterous or over-bearing. We get no liberal media coverage on
TV, to reflect our message or our opinions.
Many Americans, like you, me and all our friends, simply want to recognize
that the vast majority of America supports our troops. Our idea of showing
solidarity and support for our troops with dignity and respect starts this
Friday -and continues each and every Friday until the troops all come home,
sending a deafening message that.. Every red-blooded American who supports
our men and women afar will wear something red.
By word of mouth, press, TV -- let's make the United States on every Friday
a sea of red much like a homecoming football game in the bleachers. If
every one of us who loves this country will share this with acquaintances,
co-workers, friends, and family. It will not be long before the USA is
covered in RED and it will let our troops know the once "silent" majority
is on their side more than ever, certainly more than the media lets on.
The first thing a soldier says when asked "What can we do to make things
better for you?" is...We need your support and your prayers. Let's get
the word out and lead with class and dignity, by example; and wear
something red every Friday.
Submitted to (BFB) By: Michael Rebeiro
Posted By Dragoni: 07/21/2006
NEW WAY TO DO CAR JACKINGS (NOT A JOKE)
Heads up everyone!
You walk across the parking lot, unlock your car and get inside.
You start the engine and shift into Reverse When you look into the
rearview mirror to back out of your parking space, you notice a piece of
paper stuck to the middle of the rear window.
So, you shift into Park, unlock your doors and jump out of your car to
remove that paper (or whatever it is) that is obstructing your view.
When you reach the back of your car, that is when the carjackers
Appear out of nowhere, jump into your car and take off.
They practically mow you down as they speed off in your car.
And guess what ladies, “I bet your purse is still in the car!”
So now the carjacker has your car, your home address, your money, and your keys.
Your home and your whole identity are now compromised!
BEWARE OF THIS NEW SCHEME THAT IS NOW BEING USED.
If you see a piece of paper stuck to your back window, just drive away,
remove the paper later and be thankful that you read this e-mail.
I hope you will forward this to friends and family, especially to women.
A purse contains all kinds of personal information and identification
documents, and you certainly do NOT want this to fall into the wrong hands.
Please keep this going.
Thank you. Lieutenant Tony Bartolome Bureau of Investigations Florida
Highway Patrol
P. O. Box 593527
Orlando, FL 32859
Posted By Dragoni:
08/23/2006
The Bill Gates List !!! EXCELLENT
THIS SHOULD BE PRINTED ON THE WALLS OF ALL SCHOOLS,
STARTING IN ELEMENTARY THROUGH HIGH SCHOOL.
Love him or hate him, he sure hits the nail on the head with this!
To anyone with kids of any age, here's some advice.
Bill Gates recently gave a speech at a High School about 11 things
they did not and will not learn in school. He talks about how feel-good,
politically correct teachings created a generation of kids with no concept
of reality and how this concept set them up for failure in the real world.
Rule 1: Life is not fair - get used to it!
Rule 2: The world won't care about your self-esteem.
The world will expect you to accomplish something BEFORE you feel good about yourself.
Rule 3: You will NOT make $60,000 a year right out of high school.
You won't be a vice-president with a car phone until you earn both.
Rule 4: If you think your teacher is tough, wait till you get a boss.
Rule 5: Flipping burgers is not beneath your dignity.
Your Grandparents had a different word for burger flipping: they called it opportunity.
Rule 6: If you mess up, it's not your parents' fault,
so don't whine about your mistakes, learn from them.
Rule 7: Before you were born, your parents weren't as boring as they are now.
They got that way from paying your bills, cleaning your clothes and
listening to you talk about how
cool you thought you were.
So before you save the rain forest from the parasites of your parent's generation,
try delousing the closet in your own room.
Rule 8: Your school may have done away with winners and losers, but life HAS NOT.
In some schools, they have abolished failing grades and they'll give you as
MANY TIMES as you want to get the right answer.
This doesn't bear the slightest resemblance to ANYTHING in real life.
Rule 9: Life is not divided into semesters.
You don't get summers off and very few employers
are interested in helping you FIND YOURSELF. Do that on your own time.
Rule 10: Television is NOT real life. In real life people actually have to leave the coffee shop
and go to jobs.
Rule 11: Be nice to nerds. Chances are you'll end up working for one.
If you agree, pass it on.
If you can read this - Thank a teacher!
Posted By Dragoni: 01/08/2007
NATIONWIDE CALL TO ACTION:
ABATE OF MONTANA SAYS KEEP THOSE LETTERS, CALLS AND EMAILS COMING!
"No state shall make or enforce any law
which shall abridge the privileges
or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state
deprive
any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor
deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the
laws."--U.S. Constitution, Amendment XIV, Section 1
Fellow Freedom Fighters:
Montana State Representative Betsy Hands and Montana State Senator Lynda
Moss are continuing to sponsor Draft Bill LC1683, a mandatory motorcycle
helmet law:
Mandatory helmet laws like this one clearly demonstrate how "good
intentions
often lead to bad legislation". ABATE of Montana has asked us to
continue
to flood their offices with letters, calls and emails protesting this
bill,
which is discriminatorily unconstitutional in that--by mandating helmets
for
motorcyclists as opposed to all motorists--it would violate the "equal
protection" guaranteed by the 14th Amendment to the United States
Constitution.
Remember that this issue here is NOT "helmets", the issue is "helmet
laws".
As a distance rider, I often wear a helmet. But as an American citizen,
I
should be free to choose when and where I strap one on. This is not
about
SAFETY ... this is about FREEDOM. You will find more sound reasons to
oppose this legislation presented here:
Even if you have responded to this call-to-action before, PLEASE RESPOND
AGAIN. And even if you have forwarded this call-to-action before, PLEASE
FORWARD IT AGAIN.
From: Linda Baldwin [mailto:libaldwin@midrivers.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 2:59 PM
Subject: Draft Bill LC 1683 - There is movement on this ABATE NEEDS your
help!
Hello Everyone: Call to Action:
We have action on LC 1683...the Mandatory Motorcycle/Quadricycle Bill.
Please read below...and start calling, E-mailing, writing those letters
again. As Jill Z. told us...use the same letter you wrote last time,
just
make sure that Betsy Hands and Lynda Moss are bombarded with mail and
phone
calls.
Thanks for your immediate action on this E-mail.
Linda
Bill Actions - Current Bill Progress: In Drafting Process
Bill Action Count: 16
Action - Most Recent First Date Votes Yes Votes No
Committee
(C) Draft Delivered to Requester 01/31/2007
(C) Draft Ready for Delivery 01/03/2007
(C) Draft in Assembly/Executive Director Review 01/02/2007
(C) Draft in Final Drafter Review 01/02/2007
(C) Bill Draft Text Available Electronically 01/02/2007
(C) Draft in Input/Proofing 01/02/2007
(C) Draft to Drafter - Edit Review [CMD] 01/02/2007
Almost all motorcycle riders wear helmets.
Legal helmets are proven to save lives. However, some
helmets are sold as novelty items only; never intended
for use on the road. In a collision, these "novelty"
helmets provide almost no protection for the rider.
Unfortunately some people are confused about what
makes a helmet legal and safe to wear.
The attached PDF file will give you some insight
into buying a motorcycle helmet that
is legal to use and will afford you the greatest protection. If you would
like some
additional information, please visit the links and documents provided.
Note: You will need to have the Adobe
Acrobat Reader in order to view and print PDF
files. If you are not able to open the "Bogus Helmets" brochure,
Download the
Acrobat Reader here.
It was built with 24 tons of scrap steel from the
World Trade Center.
It is the fifth in a new class of warship - designed
for missions that include special operations against
terrorists. It will carry a crew of 360 sailors and
700 combat-ready Marines to be delivered ashore by
helicopters and assault craft.
Steel from the World Trade Center was melted down in
a foundry in Amite, LA to cast the ship's bow
section. When it was poured into the molds
on
Sept. 9, 2003, "those big rough steelworkers treated
it with total
reverence," recalled Navy Capt. Kevin Wensing, who
was there. "It was a
spiritual moment for everybody there."
Junior Chavers, foundry operations manager, said
that when the trade center steel first arrived, he
touched it with his hand and the "hair on my neck
stood up." "It had a big meaning to it for all of
us," he said. "They knocked us down. They can't keep
us down. We're going to be back."
The ship's motto? "Never Forget"
Please
keep this going so everyone can see what we are made
of in this country!
Posted By Dragoni: 02/20/2007
Joinder in Open Letter of
Bruce Arnold Calling for New Directions And
Greater Commitment in AMA Biker Rights and Safety Policy
Rob Dingman
President
American Motorcyclist Association
13515 Yarmouth Drive
Pickerington, OH 43147
Email:
rdingman@ama-cycle.org
Dear Rob,
I would like to add my congratulations on your selection as
President of the
American Motorcyclist Association.
At the same time I feel compelled to add my voice to that of
Bruce Arnold,
expressed in his Open Letter calling on you to correct what
has been, in
some respects, the past misdirected course of AMA [ http://tinyurl.com/2dnsbr
], and to call on you to please redouble AMA's
commitment, particularly when it comes to supporting biker
rights. Biker
rights means nothing more than ordinary, common dignity, the
rights of
bikers to make our own adult safety equipment choices free of
the
paternalistic dictates of government.
It is extremely important that AMA has made plain that it
supports the
rider's right to chose whether or not to wear a helmet. It is
AMA's
outstretched hand to those of us who value our dignity and
right to chose,
and we want you to know that we appreciate that AMA stands for
biker
freedom. For many of us, "rights" may be our only common
connection with
AMA, just as for others it might be racing.
There is much more that AMA can do to fulfill its commitment
to preserving
our "rights" which we have not seen in the past. One of the
main obstacles
to restoring biker dignity and freedom in half the states, and
in resisting
efforts to deprive us of our dignity and freedom in the other
half of the
states, is that the powerful insurance and medical lobbies
fund scientific
presentations at every hearing and at every other opportunity
they can
create to influence our state legislators. The presentations
are skewed to
the political ends of the helmet law proponents, most commonly
presented
without rebuttal, and all too often the skewed "scientific
evidence" is
accepted as accurate. The result is that our state legislators
succumb to
the misinformation that helmet laws are essential to avert a
fabricated
public health or "state fiscal" crisis purported to result
from motorcyclist
head injuries which they allege might be avoided by universal
helmet use.
The scientific facts are that head injuries are only a small
fraction of the
broader public health and state fiscal consequences of what is
surely an
obscene incidence of motorcycle accidents. In these motorcycle
accidents we
suffer quadriplegia, paraplegia, other spinal cord injuries,
debilitating
internal injuries, catastrophic orthopedic injuries and leg
amputations, the
incidence or severity of which could not possibly be reduced
by the use of
helmets. Even as these helmet law proponents cite the small
percentage of
head injuries which might be averted by helmets, they fail to
cite the
partially or wholly offsetting numbers of spinal cord injuries
which occur
as the result of use of helmets or the state fiscal
consequence of the
medical cost associated with caring for those who suffer
spinal injuries.
The helmet law proponents also engage in public relations
campaigns which
defame motorcyclists, complaining that this misrepresented
state fiscal
crisis results from the failures of motorcyclists to obtain
insurance. The
fact is that 2/3 of these accidents result solely from the
inattention and
negligence of auto drivers. It is the auto drivers who are
responsible under
the law and morally to pay for the injuries, medical expenses
and damages
sustained by the motorcyclists they injure (those who sustain
head injuries
or any of the other panoply of injuries we sustain at their
hands), and it
is the auto drivers who fail to meet their legal and moral
obligations to
pay our medical expenses.
The factual propositions and rhetoric urged by helmet law
proponents is all
scientifically false. We can point that out. We can show how
the data is
manufactured by contrived methodology to yield results which
are skewed and
misleading. But what our resistance to helmet laws lacks is a
good
scientific offense, including appropriately qualified experts
prepared and
fairly compensated to appear and testify at key hearings; and
we need good
written scientific position papers over the signatures of
highly qualified
epidemiologists regularly updated as new scientific studies
are published
which we can present at all other hearings and opportunities
to educate and
persuade our legislators and policy makers.
We watched in horror, for example, as the NTSB lined up only
the helmet law
proponent experts to testify at the science segment at the
outset of the
September 2006 NTSB "Motorcycle Safety" Forum. It was like a
trial in which
only one side was permitted to put on evidence. The NTSB
hearing was a
farce, indeed predestined to be a farce, as was obvious even
before the
commencement of the hearing by the contents of its agenda. But
perhaps most
importantly the NTSB hearings were farcical by reason of the
preselection of
the only scientific evidence which would be permitted to be
introduced. It
was indeed that skewed scientific presentation at the outset
of the hearings
which defined the "facts" which determined the outcome of
every subsequent
relevant segment of the hearings.
In the future, we would urge that AMA use its influence in
federal agency
hearings to assure that we are never again so outmaneuvered by
the insurance
industry, medical and manufacturer lobbies. And we would urge,
again, that
if the helmet law proponents will have the opportunity to
present their
skewed analyses, that AMA demand the opportunity to present
scientific
rebuttal, in the form of an equal number of highly qualified
experts,
including highly credentialed epidemiologists to undermine the
helmet law
proponents self serving interpretations and if necessary, the
underlying
study methodologies.
We would urge that AMA also weigh in as federal agencies
develop on any
future agenda for "safety" hearings. The agenda for the NTSB
hearing was
simply absurd, the only segment appearing on the agenda having
any prospect
of reducing the incidence of motorcycle accidents, and hence
the full
landscape of the injuries we suffer, was the "motorcycle
awareness" segment.
The largest segment of the NTSB hearing, twice the length of
any other
segment, was devoted to competitive motorcycle manufacturer
advertisements,
Honda being the winner with its novel motorcycle air bag which
Honda took
argued with its greatest effort to make plain would only fit
on its big 6
cylinder bike, and bikes of no other manufacturer.
Even the "motorcycle awareness" segment fell flat as none of
the
participants appeared in the least bit enthusiastic about the
prospect that
auto driver inattention to motorcyclists was even capable of
being
effectively altered by motorcycle awareness campaigns. This
was the only
segment of the NTSB Forum that legitimately pertained to biker
safety and
the AMA representative remained conspicuously silent,
literally without a
positive suggestion on how such a strategy might be
implemented effectively
to reach a significant percentage of auto drivers. In fairness
to AMA, the
MSF representative at this motorcycle awareness segment of the
Forum also
expressed no enthusiasm for the potential efficacy of
motorcycle awareness
campaigns. He indicated that MSF had prepared some motorcycle
awareness
informational commercials, but stated outright that the costs
of airing them
were prohibitive. He indicated that any other organization was
welcome to
use the commercials, but it was apparent that MSF wasn't about
to pick up
the tab. Indeed, the MSF representative indicated that a
single prime time
national commercial would cost several thousand dollars, and
to reach even a
small community it would cost several tens of thousands of
dollars.
Adding biker safety insult to injury the MSF representative
out of the blue
recommended instead "handheld" cell phone bans, which, as I
will demonstrate
below, are worse than no ban at all! This kind of sloppy,
extemporaneous, ad
hoc argument rather obviously thrown out just to shift
attention from the
fact that the MSF representative had nothing positive to say
about the
"motorcycle awareness" subject of the segment, is no way to
conduct
effective policy advocacy.
The only other biker representative at the segment was an
ABATE Iowa
official who described his organization's grassroots efforts
to get out into
the community to talk to auto drivers to explain to them why
we wear
leather, and he described their use of car bumper stickers
reading "My Mom
Rides a Motorcycle." As I understood this effort it was
intended to
establish good relations with the public and thus, hopefully,
to get auto
drivers to show us greater respect on the roadways. The only
other
representative on the panel was an insurance industry
representative who
completely ignored that the subject of the segment was
motorcycle awareness,
rolling his eyes when asked for his position on the potential
efficacy of
motorcycle awareness programs, and without objection from the
motorcyclist
representatives, went off on what was obviously a pre-planned,
completely
irrelevant tirade, again, on how "everyone knows" that helmet
laws are the
panacea for the dangers motorcyclists face out on the road,
throwing in his
canned argument for insurance industry deregulation.
We must never permit ourselves to be so outmaneuvered at an
NTSB or NHTSA or
other important biker safety hearing again, particularly at
hearings which
may result in findings harmful to our biker safety and biker
rights
interests. AMA is our "largest motorcyclist organization" in
the United
States, as you take pride in advertising, and the fact is that
AMA has the
power, if it will assert it, to influence the agendas for
these hearings and
demand fairness in the constitution of the panels. Where
farcical
"motorcycle safety" forum agendas are developed by our federal
agencies, or
where it appears that our federal agencies have succumbed to
insurance
industry influence in the selection of the experts and
panelists who will be
permitted to appear at the hearings, it is AMA's
responsibility as our
largest motorcyclist organization to object and object
vehemently. Indeed,
if the agency will not agree to an appropriate agenda, or if
it refuses to
permit us to field our own motorcyclist safety experts, then
rather than
succumb to such a political farce as we witnessed at the
September NTSB
hearing again, AMA should refuse to participate and call on
all other
motorcyclist organizations to boycott the hearings. If our
largest
motorcycle rider organizations refuse to participate in
sandbagged hearings,
it will undercut the pretense of legitimacy the hearings gain
from biker
organization participation. Indeed, if AMA again participates
in such
farcical anti-biker, governmental hearings as we witnessed in
the NTSB
hearings, please be forewarned that we will have no choice
than to urge and
demonstrate and publicize that you sold out our dignity and
interest in
safety.
We are also being outmaneuvered in our state legislatures, in
much the same
way. State legislative committees set hearings, the insurance
industry and
medical lobbies present their skewed "scientific" evidence
that the state is
facing a public health and/or state fiscal crisis associated
with the
incidence of motorcyclist head injuries, blame the
motorcyclists for being
underinsured, and urge that the solution to enact BandAide
helmet
legislation. Each of the propositions is easily rebutted, as
we have above,
but what we lack, again, is the offensive scientific
presentation by
qualified expert witnesses. It would be best if we could
obtain the oral
testimony of qualified scientific experts, but at the very
least we should
have up to date written scientific presentations which we can
present
rebutting the presentations of the helmet law proponents,
providing the
accurate information with regard to the true dimensions of the
public health
and fiscal consequences of the full landscape of motorcyclist
injury
resulting from motorcycle accidents; and then, good proposals
for reducing
the incidence of motorcycle accidents, and thereby to reduce
the incidence
of the full panoply of motorcyclist injury.
In the last respect, I want to take this opportunity to
suggest to you what
we at Motorcyclists Against Dumb Drivers would propose as much
better biker
safety approaches than helmet legislation to significantly
reduce the public
health and fiscal consequences resulting from what we would
agree is an
obscene incidence of motorcycle accidents on our streets and
highways.
First, and most important, because it seeks to curtail what is
the currently
the biggest single contributor to the full landscape of
motorcyclist injury,
we urge comprehensive cell phone bans with penalties
sufficient to
effectively deter motorists from engaging in all cell
conversation while
driving.
(1) The use of cell phones while driving is now indisputably
epidemic. One
out of every ten auto drivers we encounter on our American
roads and
highways at any given daylight moment in time is actively
engaged in cell
conversation. (NOPUS, December 2005);
(2) Driving under the influence of cell conversation results
in DUI level
driving impairment, and while engaged in cell conversation,
the motorists
are 4 times more likely to cause an accident. Redelmeier and
Tibshirani
(1997) "Association Between Cellular-Telephone Calls and Motor
Vehicle
Collisions." New England Journal of Medicine, 336, 453; McEvoy,
Stevenson,
McCartt, Woodward, Haworth, Palamara and Cercarelli, "Role of
Mobile Phones
in Motorvehicle Crashes Resulting in Hospital Attendance; A
Case-Crossover
Study," British Medical Journal (July 12, 2005). "The 100-Car
Naturalistic
Driving Study, Phase II," DOT HS 810 593 April, 2006. Strayer,
Drews and
Crouch, "A Comparison of the Cell Phone Driver and the Drunk
Driver," Human
Factors, Summer 2006; Strayer, D. L. & Drews, F. A. & Crouch,
D. J. (2003).
"Fatal Distraction? A Comparison of the Cell-Phone Driver and
the Drunk
Driver." In D. V. McGehee, J. D. Lee, & M. Rizzo (Eds.)
Driving Assessment
2003: International Symposium on Human Factors in Driver
Assessment,
Training, and Vehicle Design. Published by the Public Policy
Center,
University of Iowa (pp. 25-30); Strayer, D. L., & Johnston, W.
A. (2001).
"Driven to distraction: Dual-task studies of simulated driving
and
conversing on a cellular phone. Psychological Science," 12,
462-466.
McCarley, J. S., Vais, M., Pringle, H., Kramer, A. F., Irwin,
D. E., &
Strayer, D. L. (2001). "Conversation disrupts visual scanning
of traffic
scenes." Paper presented at Vision in Vehicles, Australia.
Strayer, D. L.,
Drews, F. A., Albert, R. W., & Johnston, W. A. (2001). "Cell
phone induced
perceptual impairments during simulated driving." In D. V.
McGehee, J. D.
Lee, & M. Rizzo (Eds.) Driving Assessment 2001: International
Symposium on
Human Factors in Driver Assessment, Training, and Vehicle
Design. Strayer,
D. L., Drews, F. A. & Johnston, W. A. (2002). "Why do cell
phone
conversations interfere with driving?" Proceedings of the 81st
Annual
Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC.
Strayer, D.
L., Drews, F. A. & Johnston, W. A. (2003). "Cell phone induced
failures of
visual attention during simulated driving." Journal of
Experimental
Psychology: Applied, 9, 23-23. Strayer, D. L., Drews, F. A., &
Johnston, W.
A. (2003). "Are we being driven to distraction? Public Policy
Perspectives,"
Vol. 16, 1-2. (Published by the Center for Public Policy and
Administration,
University of Utah) Strayer, D. L. & Drews, F. A. (2003).
"Effects of cell
phone conversations on younger and older drivers." In the
Proceedings of the
47nd Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics
Society (pp..
1860-1864). Strayer, D. L. & Drews, F. A. & Crouch, D. J.
(2003). "Fatal
distraction? A comparison of the cell-phone driver and the
drunk driver." In
D. V. McGehee, J. D. Lee, & M. Rizzo (Eds.) Driving Assessment
2003:
International Symposium on Human Factors in Driver Assessment,
Training, and
Vehicle Design. Published by the Public Policy Center,
University of Iowa
(pp. 25-30). Strayer, D. L., Cooper, J. M., & Drews, F. A.
(2004). "What do
drivers fail to see when conversing on a cell phone?" In the
Proceedings of
the 48nd Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics
Society (pp
2213-2217). McCarley, J.S., Vais, M.J., Pringle, H., Kamer,
A.F., Irwin,
D.E., & Strayer, D.L. (2004) "Conversation disrupts change
detection in
complex traffic scenes." Human Factors, 46, 424-436. Strayer,
D.L., & Drews,
F. A. (2004). "Profiles in driver distraction: Effects of cell
phone
conversations on younger and older drivers." Human Factors,
46, 640-649.
Strayer, D. L. & Drews, F. A. Crouch, D. J., & Johnston, W. A.
(2005). "Why
do Cell Phone Conversations Interfere with Driving?" In W. R.
Walker and D.
Herrmann (Eds.) Cognitive Technology: Essays on the
Transformation of
Thought and Society (pp. 51-6 , McFarland & Company, Inc.,
Jefferson, NC.)
(3) It is NOT holding the phone or otherwise manipulating it
which results
in the DUI level driving impairment or four fold increased
likelihood that
the motorist will cause an accident; it is the cell
conversation. It is an
"inattentional blindness" resulting from the diversion of
limited conscious
attention to the internal-cognitive tasks associated with the
give and take
of the cell conversation away from the external-visual tasks
essential for
safe driving. When drivers are engaged in cell conversation,
whether by
handheld or hands-free cell device, they fail to "see" signal
changes, they
fail to "see" cars stopping in front of them, they fail to
"see" changes in
the driving environment which would normally be expected to
automatically
draw the motorists' attention, and they fail even to "see"
what their eyes
are fixed upon. Strayer, D. L., & Johnston, W. A. (2001).
"Driven to
distraction: Dual-task studies of simulated driving and
conversing on a
cellular phone. Psychological Science," 12, 462-466. McCarley,
J. S., Vais,
M., Pringle, H., Kramer, A. F., Irwin, D. E., & Strayer, D. L.
(2001).
"Conversation disrupts visual scanning of traffic scenes."
Paper presented
at Vision in Vehicles, Australia. Strayer, D. L., Drews, F.
A., Albert, R.
W., & Johnston, W. A. (2001). "Cell phone induced perceptual
impairments
during simulated driving." In D. V. McGehee, J. D. Lee, & M.
Rizzo (Eds.)
Driving Assessment 2001: International Symposium on Human
Factors in Driver
Assessment, Training, and Vehicle Design. Strayer, D. L.,
Drews, F. A. &
Johnston, W. A. (2002). "Why do cell phone conversations
interfere with
driving?" Proceedings of the 81st Annual Meeting of the
Transportation
Research Board, Washington, DC. Strayer, D. L., Drews, F. A. &
Johnston, W.
A. (2003). "Cell phone induced failures of visual attention
during simulated
driving." Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 9,
23-23. Strayer, D.
L., Drews, F. A., & Johnston, W. A. (2003). "Are we being
driven to
distraction? Public Policy Perspectives," Vol. 16, 1-2.
(Published by the
Center for Public Policy and Administration, University of
Utah) Strayer, D.
L. & Drews, F. A. (2003). "Effects of cell phone conversations
on younger
and older drivers." In the Proceedings of the 47nd Annual
Meeting of the
Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (pp.. 1860-1864). Strayer,
D. L. &
Drews, F. A. & Crouch, D. J. (2003). "Fatal distraction? A
comparison of the
cell-phone driver and the drunk driver." In D. V. McGehee, J.
D. Lee, & M.
Rizzo (Eds.) Driving Assessment 2003: International Symposium
on Human
Factors in Driver Assessment, Training, and Vehicle Design.
Published by the
Public Policy Center, University of Iowa (pp. 25-30). Strayer,
D. L.,
Cooper, J. M., & Drews, F. A. (2004). "What do drivers fail to
see when
conversing on a cell phone?" In the Proceedings of the 48nd
Annual Meeting
of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (pp 2213-2217).
McCarley, J.S.,
Vais, M.J., Pringle, H., Kamer, A.F., Irwin, D.E., & Strayer,
D.L. (2004)
"Conversation disrupts change detection in complex traffic
scenes." Human
Factors, 46, 424-436. Strayer, D.L., & Drews, F. A. (2004).
"Profiles in
driver distraction: Effects of cell phone conversations on
younger and older
drivers." Human Factors, 46, 640-649. Strayer, D. L. & Drews,
F. A. Crouch,
D. J., & Johnston, W. A. (2005). "Why do Cell Phone
Conversations Interfere
with Driving?" In W. R. Walker and D. Herrmann (Eds.)
Cognitive Technology:
Essays on the Transformation of Thought and Society (pp. 51-6
, McFarland &
Company, Inc., Jefferson, NC.)
Since cell conversation by handheld and handsfree device
results in the
identical DUI level driving impairment and identical 4 fold
increased
likelihood that the motorist will cause an accident, please
see clearly that
handheld cell phone bans, such as was urged by our MSF
representative at the
NTSB Forum can have no possible positive safety effect,
because motorists
will simply purchase hands-free devices for use in their
vehicles. Indeed,
that handheld cell phone bans are likely to have little if any
impact on the
epidemic of injury associated with the current epidemic of
driving under the
influence of cell conversation is an observation made by the
most respected
scientists in the field.
"These data call into question driving regulations that
prohibit handheld
cell phones and permit hands-free cell phones because no
significant
differences were found in the impairments to driving caused by
these two
modes of cellular communication." Strayer, D. L., Drews, F.
A., & Johnston,
W. A. (2003). "Are We Being Driven to Distraction?" Public
Policy
Perspectives, Vol. 16, 1-2. (Published by the Center for
Public Policy and
Administration, University of Utah). Strayer has indeed made
this clear at
least since 2001:
"Our data imply that legislative initiatives that restrict
handheld devices
but permit hands-free devices are not likely to reduce
interference from the
phone conversation, because the interference is, in this case,
due to
central attentional processes." Strayer, D. L., & Johnston, W.
A. (2001).
"Driven to Distraction: Dual-task Studies of Simulated Driving
and
Conversing on a Cellular Phone." Psychological Science, 12,
462-466. See
also, Strayer, D. L., Drews, F. A. & Johnston, W. A. (2002).
"Why Do Cell
Phone Conversations Interfere With Driving?" Proceedings of
the 81st Annual
Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC.
This sentiment was echoed by Johns Hopkins Professor Yantis,
based on his
above described neurological studies, "Our research helps
explain why
talking on a cell phone can impair driving performance, even
when the driver
is using a hands-free device." Stromstein & Yantis, supra.
We would urge that handheld cell phone legislation is even
worse than no ban
at all because the legislation misinforms the public that
driving under the
influence of hands-free cell conversation is somehow "safe."
Secondly, if AMA shall come to the conclusion that the
currently conceived
"motorcycle awareness" advertising campaigns are not a
feasible means both
to increase auto drivers "awareness" of bikers and to change
their driving
behaviors which put us at risk, then we would urge that AMA
engage in the
appropriate research to determine what can be done to force
motorists to
"see" us.
First, let's accurately define the problem. The AMA has
succumbed for too
long to the unfortunate misinformation that motorcycle
accidents, and
particular intersection accidents, are the result of the "lack
of
conspicuity" of the motorcycle. It is by this fiction indeed
that NHTSA long
ago abrogated its responsibility to provide the solutions for
what amounts
to 50 percent of all multi-vehicle motorcycle accidents
occurring as the
result of auto driver inattention at intersections. Auto
drivers enter
intersections and turn left at intersections into our rights
of way,
commonly exclaiming after killing or maiming us, "I didn't see
the
motorcycle." NHTSA is composed of a bunch of bi-speckled bean
counters, but
as we understand it, our AMA representatives are
motorcyclists, right? You
know, as motorcyclists, that our breaking ability is quicker
and that our
bikes are capable of extraordinary maneuverability, permitting
us to avoid
just about every hazard that an auto driver can create -
unless the driver
pulls right out in front of us. Indeed, the auto drivers must
pull out into
our right of way, directly in front of us, to create a hazard
we can't
avoid. So these accidents clearly do not result from our "lack
of
conspicuity"; we are right in front of them.
Do the research. Begin with Mack & Rock, "Inattentional
Blindness" 1998.
These fifty percent of multi-vehicle motorcycle accidents
result from auto
driver visual-visual "inattentional blindness," not "lack of
conspicuity."
We know much more about the mechanism of conscious attention
than we did in
the early 1980s when the term "lack of conspicuity" was first
used in this
context by Harry Hurt. We think we "see" much like a video
recorder, but
this couldn't be further from the truth. True enough, our eyes
will take in
the full landscape of visual information, which will in turn
be transmitted
to our brains received by our subconscious. But at the
subconscious level
this visual information is processed, indeed extensively
processed, and
then, only in late processing, just a very small portion of
this visual
information is permitted through what amounts to a bottleneck
into conscious
attention. And it is only what is received into our conscious
attention
which we consciously "see." Hence the conscious experience of
the auto
driver who reports "I didn't see him," notwithstanding that
the motorcyclist
was right in front of him.
The literature also describes the factors which result in
visual-visual
inattentional blindness, including those which we have
concluded are most
important in this context, to wit, "expectation" and
"relevance." In
addition, making observation of an object task-relevant is
effective in
modifying what the target subject population will "see." In
processing,
visual information which is "expected" is preferentially
passed through to
conscious attention; and visual information which is
considered more
"relevant" is also more likely reach conscious attention. Auto
drivers do
not "expect" to see motorcycles, and they don't consider us as
"relevant" as
they might an oncoming car, truck or bus, so our appearance in
their visual
field is less likely to reach their conscious attention - and
we are less
likely to be "seen" by the auto driver.
The importance of understanding specifically why auto drivers
don't "see" us
is that we might spend an enormous amount of energy and money
on "motorcycle
awareness" television campaigns, based on the assumption that
just telling
them to look for us should be effective, for example, and in
the end have no
impact at all upon auto driver behavior or the numbers of
motorcyclists
injured at intersections.
I don't know whether the types of television commercials which
MSF has
created, as an example, would have any prospect at all of
influencing auto
driver behavior, because I don't believe that the assumptions
upon which the
content of the commercials was determined was scientifically
based. What AMA
should take on as its responsibility is first to commission
the research to
arrive at a good understanding of the factors which lead auto
drivers not to
see us, and studies then to provide the information essential
to fashion
appropriate remedies for auto driver inattentional blindness.
We have suggested a number of strategies to modify auto driver
values of
expectation and relevance based upon our own research. We have
also
recommended an alternative to expensive and probably
impractical television
advertising, and that is to avail the state auto driver
education programs,
including by urging that the motorcycle education booklets
which auto
drivers study to obtain or renew their drivers licenses by
modified to
provide comprehensive information on the strategies which auto
drivers must
employ for the protection of motorcyclists. As a part of those
recommendations we seek to alter auto driver "expectation" for
motorcycles,
inter alia, by providing auto drivers a "task" to perform as
they enter and
turn left at intersection, in this case to take the time to
carefully gauge
the motorcycle's speed. The purpose isn't to get the auto
drivers to
determine the motorcycle's speed, although, that can be a side
benefit. The
purpose is to force the auto driver to "attend" to the
motorcycle, to "see"
it, as an essential prerequisite to gaguing its speed. We urge
that the
written tests that auto drivers must take to obtain or renew
their drivers
licenses also be modified to contain a comprehensive list of
motorcyclist
safety questions, and that those drivers who fail to answer
all motorcyclist
safety questions be require to retake the test.
Indeed, we urge that the curricula of all driver education
courses,
including high school courses and court ordered courses be
modified to
include the same information on the strategies which auto
drivers must
employ for the protection of motorcyclists.
In terms of increasing the "relevance" auto drivers attach to
the appearance
of an oncoming motorcyclists we consider that it is essential
to invoke the
auto driver's self interest. For example, we urge
"motorcyclist specific"
ROW legislation, or ROW legislation with motorcyclist specific
penalty
provisions. We urge that severe penalties, such as automatic,
lengthy,
drivers license suspensions, for ROW violations which result
in motorcyclist
death or injury are essential to impress upon the auto driver
the specific
self-interest relevance of the oncoming motorcyclist.
In sum, we consider that it is AMA responsibility as our
largest
motorcyclist organization in the United States to do what is
required to put
the helmet law proponents out of business as we chose to
redirect our
national and state concerns about what we agree are very
serious public
health and state fiscal concerns more accurately defined by
the full panoply
of injury suffered my motorcyclists in accidents. Our AMA
approach must be
both to defend our dignity and to fight for our safety, on the
one hand
demonstrating that helmet laws are ill-designed to
significantly reduce the
incidence of motorcyclist injury and at the same time put
forth good
alternative solutions better calculated to reduce the
incidence of the full
landscape motorcyclist injury across the board.
We look forward to your accomplishing an end to this wasteful,
never ending,
helmet law tug-of-war during your tenure as President of AMA,
and a return
to sane safety policy, for which you will be remembered as our
leader who
restored our dignity and provided us significantly greater
safety as we
enjoy our chosen lives as eagles in flight, rather than caged
in parakeets.
Good for him!!!
Surprised CBS let him get away with this even though he's
right!!!
AMEN ANDY ROONEY!
Right on, Andy Rooney!
Andy Rooney said on "60 Minutes" a few weeks back:
I don't think being a minority makes you a victim of anything
except numbers. The only things I can think of that are truly
discriminatory are things like the United Negro College Fund,
Jet Magazine, Black Entertainment Television, and Miss Black
America. Try to have things like the United Caucasian College
Fund, Cloud Magazine, White Entertainment Television, or Miss
White America; and see what happens...Jesse Jackson will be
knocking down your door.
Guns do not make you a killer. I think killing makes you a
killer. You can kill someone with a baseball bat or a car, but
no one is trying to ban you from driving to the ball game.
I believe they are called the Boy Scouts for a reason, which
is why there are no girls allowed. Girls belong in the Girl
Scouts! ARE YOU LISTENING MARTHA BURKE?
I think that if you feel homosexuality is wrong, it is not a
phobia, it is an opinion.
I have the right "NOT" to be tolerant of others because they
are different, weird, or tick me off.
When 70% of the people who get arrested are black, in cities
where 70% of the population is black, that is not racial
profiling; it is the Law of Probability.
I believe that if you are selling me a milkshake, a pack of
cigarettes, a newsp aper or a hotel room, you must do it in
English! As a matter of fact, if you want to be an American
citizen, you should have to speak English!
My father and grandfather didn't die in vain so you can leave
the countries you were born in to come over and disrespect
ours.
I think the police should have every right to shoot your sorry
ass if you threaten them after they tell you to stop. If you
can't understand the word "freeze" or "stop" in English, see
the above lines.
I don't think just because you were not born in this country,
you are qualified for any special loan programs, government
sponsored bank loans or tax breaks, etc., so you can open a
hotel, coffee shop, trinket store, or any other business.
We did not go to the aid of certain foreign countries and risk
our lives in wars to defend their freedoms, so that decades
later they could come over here and tell us our constitution
is a living document; and open to their interpretations.
I d on't hate the rich I don't pity the poor.
I know pro wrestling is fake, but so are movies and
television. That doesn't stop you from watching them.
I think Bill Gates has every right to keep every penny he made
and continue to make more. If it ticks you off, go and invent
the next operating system that's better, and put your name on
the building.
It doesn't take a whole village to raise a child right, but it
does take a parent to stand up to the kid; and smack their
little behinds when necessary, and say "NO!"
I think tattoos and piercing are fine if you want them, but
please don't pretend they are a political statement. And,
please, stay home until that new lip ring heals. I don't want
to look at your ugly infected mouth as you serve me French
fries!
I am sick of "Political Correctness." I know a lot of black
people, and not a single one of them was born in Africa ; so
how can they be "African-Americans"? Besides, Africa is a
continent. I don't go around saying I am a European-American
because my great, great, great, great, great, great
grandfather was from Europe . I am proud to be from
America
and nowhere else
And if you don't like my point of view, tough...
I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG, OF THE UNITED STATES OF
AMERICA , AND TO THE REPUBLIC, FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION
UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL!
I was asked to send this on if I agree or delete if I don't.
It is said that 86% of Americans believe in God. Therefore I
have a very hard time understanding why there is such a
problem in having "In God We Trust" on our money and having
"God" in the Pledge of Allegiance. Why don't we just tell the
14% to Shut Up and BE QUIET!!!
If you agree, pass this on, if not delete. Posted
By Dragoni: 04/01/07
W
ashington
State
Patrol
Media
Release
Chief John R. Batiste
Captain Jeff DeVere
Government and Media Relations
(360) 753-5299 – office
(360) 753-5469 – fax
The Verdict: Hang Up Don’t Fall
for Jury Duty Scam
06/02/06
The phone rings, you pick it
up, and the caller identifies himself as an officer
of the court. He says you failed to report for jury
duty and that a warrant is out for your arrest. You
say you never received a notice. To clear it up, the
caller says he’ll need some information for
“verification purposes”—your
birth date, social security number, maybe even a
credit card number.
This is when you should hang
up the phone. It’s a scam.
Jury scams have been around
for years, but have seen a resurgence in recent
months. Communities in more than a dozen states have
issued public warnings about cold calls from people
claiming to be court officials seeking personal
information. As a rule, court officers never ask for
confidential information over the phone; they
generally correspond with prospective jurors via
mail.
The scam’s bold simplicity
may be what makes it so effective. Facing the
unexpected threat of arrest, victims are caught off
guard and may be quick to part with some information
to defuse the situation.
“They get you scared
first,” says a special agent in the Minneapolis
field office who has heard the complaints. “They get
people saying, ‘Oh my gosh! I’m not a criminal.
What’s going on?’” That’s when the scammer dangles a
solution-a fine, payable by credit card, that will
clear up the problem.
With enough information,
scammers can assume your identity and empty your
bank accounts.
“It seems like a very simple
scam,” the agent adds. The trick is putting people
on the defensive, then reeling them back in with the
promise of a clean slate. “It’s kind of ingenious.
It’s social engineering.”
More Information
Want to
learn more about new and common scams like
this one? Then sign up for
our e-mail alerts.
In recent months,
communities in Florida, New York, Minnesota,
Illinois, Colorado, Oregon, California, Virginia,
Oklahoma, Arizona, and New Hampshire reported scams
or posted warnings or press releases on their local
websites. In August, the federal court system issued
a warning on the scam and urged people to call their
local District Court office if they receive
suspicious calls. In September, the FBI issued a
press release about jury scams and suggested victims
also contact their local FBI field office.
In March,
USA.gov, the
federal government’s information website, posted
details about jury scams in their Frequently Asked
Questions area. The site reported scores of queries
on the subject from website visitors and callers
seeking information.
The jury scam is a simple
variation of the identity-theft ploys that have
proliferated in recent years as personal information
and good credit have become thieves’ preferred prey,
particularly on the Internet. Scammers might tap
your information to make a purchase on your credit
card, but could just as easily sell your information
to the highest bidder on the Internet’s black
market.
Protecting yourself is
the key: Never give out personal information
when you receive an unsolicited phone call.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration gathered
hundreds of pages of research and warnings about the
hazards of drivers using cell phones, but withheld the information from
the public in part out of fear
of angering Congress, a newspaper reported Monday.
The former head of
the traffic safety agency, Dr. Jeffrey Runge, told The New
York Times that he was urged to withhold
the findings to avoid antagonizing members of Congress who warned the
agency against lobbying states. Runge said
transit officials told him he could jeopardize billions of dollars of its
financing if Congress thought the agency
had crossed the line into lobbying, the Times said.
Critics say that
the failure of the Transportation Department to pursue the
role of driving distractions in car crashes
has resulted in traffic deaths and allowed multitasking while driving to
grow.
The research
findings were obtained by the Center for Auto Safety and
Public Citizen through
Freedom of Information requests, the Times said. The newspaper posted the
documents on its Web site Monday night.
The findings
included:
_ Cell phone usage
by drivers increased 50 percent, from 4 percent in 2000 to 6
percent in 2002.
_ Driver
distraction contributes to about 25 percent of all
police-reported traffic crashes.
_ Cell phone use is
growing as a distraction while driving.
Draft
recommendations from NHTSA included that "drivers not use
these devices when driving except in an emergency."
Legislation
forbidding the use of hand-held cell phones while driving
was not recommended because
it does not address the problem and may instead lead drivers to think
handsfree phones are safer.
The problem is that
a cell phone conversation takes the driver's focus off the
road, the studies showed.
The Times said the
Center for Auto Safety and Public Citizen will release the
documents Tuesday.
Posted by Dragoni 07/21/2009
The FACT
is Free Men Own Firearms, Slaves DO NOT!!!!
American Freedom Fighter - B1!
Ask Me How!!!
A
LITTLE GUN HISTORY
In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From
1929 to1953,
about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves,
were
rounded up and exterminated.
------------------------------
In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to
1917, 1.5
million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were
rounded up and
exterminated.
------------------------------
Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to
1945, a
total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to
defend
themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
------------------------------
China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952,
20 million
political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were
rounded up
and exterminated.
-----------------------------
Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to
1981,
100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were
rounded up
and exterminated.
-------------
Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979,
300,000
Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up
and
exterminated.
------------------------------
Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to
1977, one
million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were
rounded
up and exterminated.
In the 20th century the number killed because of gun control:
56 million.
------------------------------
It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia
were forced
by new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be
destroyed by
their own Government, a program, costing Australia
taxpayers more
than $500 million dollars.
The first year results are now in:
Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent.
Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent.
Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent
(yes, 44 percent)!
In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms
are now up
300 percent. Note that while the law-abiding citizens
turned them
in, the criminals did not, and criminals still possess
their guns!
While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady
decrease in
armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically
upward in
the past 12 months, since criminals now are guaranteed
that their
prey is unarmed. There has also been a dramatic increase
in break-
ins and assaults of the ELDERLY. Australian politicians
are at a
loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after
such
monumental effort, and expense was expended in
successfully ridding
Australian society of guns.
You won't see this data on the US evening news, or hear
politicians
disseminating this information.
Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and
property and,
yes, gun-control laws adversely affect only the
law-abiding citizens.
Take note my fellow Americans, before it's too late!
The next time someone talks in favor of gun control,
please remind
them of this history lesson.
With guns, we are 'citizens'.. Without them, we are
'subjects'.
During WWII the Japanese decided not to invade America
because they
knew most Americans were ARMED!
If you value your freedom, please spread this anti-gun
control
message to all of your friends.
The purpose of fighting is to win. There is no possible
victory in
defense. The sword is more important than the shield, and
skill is
more important than either. The final weapon is the brain.
All else
is supplemental.
SWITZERLAND ISSUES EVERY HOUSEHOLD A GUN!
SWITZERLAND'S GOVERNMENT TRAINS EVERY ADULT THEY ISSUE A
RIFLE.
SWITZERLAND HAS THE LOWEST GUN RELATED CRIME RATE OF ANY
CIVILIZED
COUNTRY IN THE WORLD!!!
IT'S A NO BRAINER!
DON'T LET OUR GOVERNMENT WASTE MILLIONS OF OUR TAX DOLLARS
IN AN
EFFORT TO MAKE ALL LAW ABIDING CITIZENS AN EASY TARGET.
If you believe in the 2nd Amendment, please forward to a
friend.
The embers glowed
softly, and in their dim light,
I gazed round the room and I cherished the sight.
My wife was asleep, her head on my chest,
My daughter beside me, angelic in rest.
Outside the snow fell, a blanket of white,
Transforming the yard to a winter delight.
The sparkling
lights in the tree I believe,
Completed the magic that was Christmas Eve.
My eyelids were heavy, my breathing was deep,
Secure and surrounded by love I would sleep.
In perfect contentment, or so it would seem,
So I slumbered, perhaps I started to dream.
The sound wasn't
loud, and it wasn't too near,
But I opened my eyes when it tickled my ear.
Perhaps just a cough, I didn't quite know,
Then the sure
sound of footsteps outside in the snow.
My soul gave a tremble, I struggled to hear,
And I crept to the door just to see who was near.
Standing out in
the cold and the dark of the night,
A lone figure stood, his face weary and tight.
A soldier, I puzzled, some twenty years old,
Perhaps a Marine, huddled here in the cold.
Alone in the dark, he looked up and smiled,
Standing watch over me, and my wife and my child.
"What are you
doing?" I asked without fear,
"Come in this moment, it's freezing out here!
Put down your pack, brush the snow from your sleeve,
You should be at home on a cold Christmas Eve!"
For barely a moment I saw his eyes shift,
Away from the cold and the snow blown in drifts..
To the window
that danced with a warm fire's light
Then he sighed and he said "Its really all right,
I'm out here by choice. I'm here every night."
"It's my duty to stand at the front of the line,
That separates you from the darkest of times.
No one had to ask
or beg or implore me,
I'm proud to stand here like my fathers before me.
My Gramps died at ' Pearl on a day in December,"
Then he sighed, "That's a Christmas 'Gram always remembers."
My dad stood his watch in the jungles of ' Nam ',
And now it is my turn and so, here I am.
I've not seen my
own son in more than a while,
But my wife sends me pictures, he's sure got her smile.
Then he bent and he carefully pulled from his bag,
The red, white, and blue... an American flag.
I can live through the cold and the being alone,
Away from my family, my house and my home.
I can stand at
my post through the rain and the sleet,
I can sleep in a foxhole with little to eat.
I can carry the weight of killing another,
Or lay down my life with my sister and brother..
Who stand at the front against any and all,
To ensure for all time that this flag will not fall."
" So go back
inside," he said, "harbor no fright,
Your family is waiting and I'll be all right."
"But isn't there something I can do, at the least,
"Give you money," I asked, "or prepare you a feast?
It seems all too little for all that you've done,
For being away from your wife and your son."
Then his eye
welled a tear that held no regret,
"Just tell us you love us, and never forget.
To fight for our rights back at home while we're gone,
To stand your own watch, no matter how long.
For when we come home, either standing or dead,
To know you remember we fought and we bled.
Is payment enough, and with that we will trust,
That we mattered to you as you mattered to us." PLEASE, would you do me
the kind favor of sending this to as many
people as you can? Christmas
will be coming soon and some credit is due to our
U.S. service men and women for our being able to celebrate
these
festivities. Let's try in this small way to pay a tiny bit
of what we owe. Make people
stop and think of our heroes, living and dead, who
sacrificed themselves for us. LCDR
Jeff Giles, SC, USN
30th Naval Construction Regiment
OIC, Logistics Cell One
Al Taqqadum, Iraq "Real
Integrity is doing the right thing, knowing that no body's
going to know whether you did it or not."
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, THEY ARE OUR FAMILY MEMBERS!
The
New 44cent stamp...
Please read
this .It's important
Looks pretty
doesn't it?
Pretty
deceiving....
PLEASE, DON'T USE THESE STAMPS!
NOT FOR VALENTINE'S, NOT FOR ANY MAIL!!
USPS 44-Cent Stamp Celebrates
Muslim holidays Eid Al-Fitr and Eid Al-Adha .
This image is a larger version of
the Muslim holidays
Eid Custom Postage product.
If there is only ONE
thing you forward &
Talk about today... let it be this!
REMEMBER to adamantly & vocally
BOYCOTT
this stamp, when you are purchasing your stamps
at the post office.
All you have to say is: "No
thank you, I do not want that Muslim
Stamp on my letters!"
To use this stamp would be a slap in
the face
to all those AMERICANS who died at the hands
of those whom this stamp honors.
REMEMBER the MUSLIM
bombing of Pan Am Flight 103!
REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing
of the World Trade Center in 1993!
REMEMBER the MUSLIM
bombing of the Marine Barracks in Lebanon !
REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing
of the Military
Barracks in Saudi Arabia !
REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing
of the American Embassies in Africa !
REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing
of the USS COLE!
REMEMBER the MUSLIM attack
on 9/11/2001 !
REMEMBER all the AMERICAN
lives that were lost in those vicious MUSLIM attacks!
Pass this along to every Patriotic American
that you know
and get the word out!
Honor the United States of
America !
Not the MUSLIM Nation!
Posted By: Dragoni
Before you send out any chain Emails Verify if they are True or
False! http://www.snopes.com
