April 29, 2007

NAIS in Missouri

Mike Johnson, National Cattlemen's Beef Association testified before the Missouri House Ag Policy Committee last Thursday:

those opposed to this program (NAIS) are mostly animal rights activists, environmental extremists, or people with diseased animals.
Yeah, Mike, that's what we are. . .not! What we are is aware of the unconstitutionality of NAIS and how you big agribiz guys have a large financial stake in the outcome so you will say anything to make NAIS happen.

Dr Taylor Woods, State Vet of Missouri testified for "information purposes" on Thursday's House Ag Policy Committee chaired by John Quinn. He said, "Two or three weeks ago in Sacramento, Dr. John Clifford of the USDA told us that if we didn't have this animal id in our state we would lose our brucellosis, tuberculosis and pseudorabies virus free status and have to test everything." But of course, this is a "voluntary with a capital V program"!!

Here is an update about NAIS in fight in Missouri from Doreen Hannes:

What? NAIS in Missouri
Where? Jefferson City Capitol Building-Hearing room area in basement
When? May 1st, Tuesday at 8:30am
Why? Because Chairman Quinn will not allow SB428 out of committee as it passed the Senate 29-2.....If you care at all, now is the time to take action.

On Tuesday morning, May 1st we absolutely must be in Jefferson City to hit every reps office with a simple, solid message regarding NAIS. That message is:

"We need No NAIS in the state of Missouri. No "voluntary", no mandatory and definitely no "State" NAIS. Bring Senate Bill 428 to the floor as it passed the Senate 29-2 and let the people be represented."

Here is the plan...We will meet in the basement Hearing Room area at 8:30 am and will have a brief meeting and split up the offices of the reps between those who show up. Then we will meet with every rep possible face to face and let them see that we are serious about this and do not want anything to do with it. Your rep is only one of those who makes laws that affect you. Every representative is your representative.

We must let them see that people are concerned enough about this to show up. Every single person represents many times themselves. Please show up. You can't have anything better to do than to fight for your own ability to feed yourselves. Remember less than 2% of the national population is involved in agriculture and this will take care of all but corporate ag, which
will then quickly go south of the border in search of cheap labor.

April 23, 2007

Pork anyone? Care for a side of melamine?

Whoa! They fed pigs in this country with the recalled pet food?

California's State Public Health Officer Dr. Mark Horton considers the health risks to be minimal. Hey, Doc! Have a plate and wash it down with cloned milk.

Who the f*ck is in charge?

Pork News
Calif. food safety officials follow tainted hog trail

By Tom Johnston on 4/23/2007 for Meatingplace.com

Four meat vendors received hogs tainted with melamine from a Ceres, Calif., farm, the California Department of Food and Agriculture said.

USDA said it seized all product from American Hog Farm that had been sent to a federally inspected facility, preventing it from entering the commercial food pipeline, CDFA said in media reports.

Of three state-inspected facilities, one received animals from American Hog Farm since April 3, the period in question, but none of them had been exposed to melamine-contaminated feed. Meanwhile, CDFA found and quarantined all exposed animals at a second facility before they could be sold.

The third vendor, Bar None of Half Moon Bay, Calif., received hogs that may have been exposed to contaminated feed. CDFA said Bar None bought 42 pigs this month from the farm that may have eaten the feed.

Meantime, CDFA is focusing efforts on contacting customers of American Hog Farm and Bar None to recommend that the pigs in question not be consumed, but, if already eaten, State Public Health Officer Dr. Mark Horton considers the health risks to be minimal.

On April 18, FDA notified CFDA that American Hog Farm received melamine-contaminated feed. (See Calif. hog farm quarantined after discovery of industrial chemical, Meatingplace.com, April 20, 2007.)

=================

Calif. hog farm quarantined after discovery of industrial chemical

By Tom Johnston on 4/20/2007 for Meatingplace.com

California authorities quarantined a Stanislaus County hog farm after an industrial chemical tied to a broad pet-food recall was discovered in pig urine.

The state's Department of Food and Agriculture said it was conducting more testing to determine if the chemical, melamine, entered the meat produced by American Hog Farm, the Associated Press reported.

"Although all animals appear healthy, we are taking this action out of an abundance of caution," State Veterinarian Dr. Richard Breitmeyer said. "It is unknown if the chemical will be detected in meat."

Authorities theorize that the melamine derived from rice protein concentrate imported from China by a Lathrop, Calif.-based Diamond Pet Foods facility, which makes products under the Natural Balance brand. Diamond also sold salvage pet food to the farm for pig feed.

Pacoima, Calif.-based Natural Balance on Monday issued a limited recall of its venison and brown rice canned and bagged dog foods, venison and brown rice dog treats and venison and green pea dry cat food.

Melamine, used in several industrial processes such as making plastics, has tainted more than 100 brands of dog and cat food and been blamed for causing health problems in dozens of dogs and cats.

Investigators were also scanning the farm's sales records to determine which customers may be affected by the quarantine, CDFA spokesman Steve Lyle told AP, noting that it generally doesn't supply meat to commercial outlets.

Officials urged anyone who bought pigs from American Hog Farm since April 3 refrain from eating the product until further notice. Thus far, "evidence suggests a minimal health risk to persons who may have consumed pork" from the farm, State Public Health Officer Dr. Mark Horton said.

So, let me see if I got this straight. Melamine laced rice, corn and wheat gluten killed pets who ate the food that was perhaps contaminated on purpose yet evidence suggests a minimal health risk to anyone who might have consumed pork who ate the same food. The must think we are stupid.

Soylent green, anyone?

"USDA has so far shown no desire whatsoever to trace back the contaminant to the source of the contamination."

And yet they somehow insist on persisting (definition: to go on resolutely or stubbornly in spite of opposition) with the phony idea of traceability in livestock.

(Hi there, BrandX. Who are you?)

Food Safety
Recalls come at critical time for FSIS

By John Gregerson on 4/23/2007 for Meatingplace.com

Timing, as the saying goes, is everything.

No sooner did members of USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service endure a scathing session with the House Agriculture Subcommittee on the issue of food-borne illness last week than they were confronted with a pair of major recalls on Friday, both involving outbreaks of E. coli O157:H7.

In Sonoma County, Calif., at least three children were sickened after consuming hamburgers from Calistoga Little League baseball snack shacks on April 3. On Friday, Merced, Calif.-based distributor Richwood Meat Co. voluntarily recalled more than 100,000 ponds of frozen ground beef patties associated with the outbreak. The frozen patties initially were distributed to discount grocers and institutional foodservice providers in California, Arizona, Idaho, Oregon and Washington.

Across the country, South Claysburg, Pa.-based processor HFX Inc. voluntarily recalled 259,230 pounds of beef product after discovering a positive test for E. coli in Eastern Pennsylvania. The Pennsylvania Department of Health linked steaks manufactured by HFX to a late-March outbreak involving Hoss's Family Steak and Sea Restaurants, a Pennsylvania-based meat chain. Authorities speculate the illnesses resulted from undercooked steak product. Four of the five consumers who became ill required hospitalization.

Both recalls arrive on the heels of a recent report from the Centers for Disease Control indicating that instances of foodborne illness in the United States have either risen or remained the same over the past five years. Although FSIS data shows unchanging or decreasing figures among plant samples, the CDC figures and a report from the Government Accountability Office indicating that one-third of U.S. meat plants weren't inspected last year prompted Rep. Rosa DeLauro [D.-Conn.] to blast FSIS during the April 18 House Agriculture Subcommittee hearing.

After losing her temper, DeLauro said, "I am going to do everything I can to delay [FSIS's risk-based plant inspection initiative] until we're standing on solid facts." The initiative, which already has been delayed until summer, essentially seeks to deploy inspectors where they are needed most, meaning some plants would receive more visits than others.

Traceability troubles

Friday's recalls also prompted allegations that FSIS never attempted to identify the processor involved in an earlier recall involving Richwood Meat. On Feb. 24, 2004, the distributor recalled 90,000 pounds of ground beef for E. coli. John Munsell, president of Montana Quality Foods, told Meatingplace.com that when he contacted the company about the matter on Feb. 26, he was told that "USDA has so far shown no desire whatsoever to trace back the contaminant to the source of the contamination."

Richmond VP Steve Wood refused to discuss either Friday's recall or the 2004 incident with Meatingplace.com.

He did, however, take time to tell other members of the media that the blame for Friday's recall rests with his company's suppliers. "It's supposed to be clean, but they are picking out [only] little samples here and there," he said.

Wood indicated he didn't really know who "they" are. Munsell said he hoped FSIS puts forth the effort to find out.

April 20, 2007

A classic example of the misinformation being pandered by the misinformants

The following article is has obviously been written using the USDA's How To Handbook. The mantra is "we need to dispel some myths and misinformation from a 'small group of producers'". We, that small group, are totally educated about NAIS and only seek to shine a light under the USDA's bushel basket to reveal the truth.

The liars call the truth tellers liars so often the liars don't even know they are lying anymore.

Animal ID myths to be exposed at ag summit

Oklahoma

Perhaps no agricultural program has ever generated more heated debate or misinformation than the National Animal Identification System proposed by USDA. State Veterinarian, Dr. Becky Brewer, plans to dispel some myths about the program at the upcoming Oklahoma Farm and Ranch Summits.

"We need to address the falsehoods that are circulating about this program and what it will mean to livestock owners," she said. "There is a small group of producers who have voiced cost and privacy concerns and we need to address those fears."

The Oklahoma Farm and Ranch Summits will be held in Weatherford and Okemah on April 26 and 27 and May 10 and 11 respectively. Brewer said she hopes people who do not know enough about the program and those who oppose the program will attend.

"Most producers who have taken the time to learn what this program is about understand that it's an animal health monitoring tool and many have registered their premises," she said. "What we need now is the opportunity to present the facts to the other side."

The animal identification program was created to enable animal health officials to determine the origin of livestock found to be diseased within 48 hours of discovery. Brewer said the 2003 discovery of an imported dairy cow that tested positive for bovine spongiform encephalopathy proved the need for such a program.

"Canada's animal identification program enabled us to trace the infected cow to the farm where it was born," she said. "Had it originated somewhere in the U.S. we may have never determined exactly what farm it came from."

Agritourism, water issues, biofuels and other topics are also scheduled for the summits. The western regional summit in Weatherford will also feature no-till farming practices while the eastern summit in Okemah has a program on prescribed burning and other forestry issues scheduled.

Each summit begins on a Thursday evening with a reception and presentations on successful agritourism venues. The western summit will be held at P-Bar Farms and the eastern summit at The Grape Ranch.

For those who pre-register by April 20 the cost of the programs are $10 for the Thursday evening program only, $20 for the Friday program only, or $25 for both days. Registration at the door will be $15 for Thursdays, $25 for Friday programs or $35 for both days.

Pre-registration information is available online at www.oda.state.ok.us. To register by telephone contact Amber Lawles, Associate Commissioner of Agriculture at 405-522-5489.

B

16

4/23/07

5 Star OK

Date: 4/19/07

Let's connect the dots in Wisconsin

First we have this about pseudorabies in Wisconsin who has been PRV free since 2000.


Pseudorabies Confirmed in Wisconsin

04/19/2007

Tests at the U.S. Department of Agriculture laboratory in Ames, Iowa, confirmed that the disease found in a Clark County Wis. Swine herd is pseudorabies. The virus (PRV) is a disease of swine that can also affect cattle, horses, dogs, cats, sheep and goats. PRV is an extremely contagious herpes virus that causes reproductive problems, including abortion, stillbirths, and even occasional death losses in breeding and finishing animals.

PRV is not contagious to humans nor is it a food safety issue.

The Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade, and Consumer Protection now has 15 days from confirmation to depopulate the infected herd and test all swine herds within five miles of it in order to retain Wisconsin’s pseudorabies-free status. Most of the animals will be allowed to go to market for use as food, because the meat is safe to eat. Animals that cannot be marketed will be euthanized humanely. The herd consists of about 300 pigs.

“This reinforces the importance of premises registration,” said Patrick Webb, director of swine health programs for the Pork Checkoff. “Having a premises ID will allow state officials to quickly identify the producers in the effected area that need to be contacted to let them know about a highly contagious regulatory disease.”

Then there is this:

Animal ID discussion in Wisconsin

By Dairy Herd news source (Friday, April 20, 2007)

The Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection will host a meeting next week to discuss how to handle incidences of state residents refusing to participate in Wisconsin’s mandatory premises registration program.

The meeting is slated for April 25 at 10:30 a.m. in the DATCP building in Madison, Wis.

A DATCP spokesperson says that while the meeting is open to the public, it will not be a public forum.

Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection.

So I am curious about the sudden onset of PRV. Is that going to be used as the excuse for why people should sign up for NAIS? That does seem to be the USDA way, come up with any excuse to promote NAIS, like the good work they say they did during the Colorado blizzard.

And what are they going to do, any how, with the pesky stupid farmers who are resisting.

Hello BrandX

I've got a fan! Thanks for coming by so often. If I knew who you are, I'd post things specific to you. What cha looking for? Let me know.

April 16, 2007

Imported food rarely inspected

Again, time and time again, FDA and USDA fail miserably at their jobs of making sure our food supply is not compromised. It is time for the FDA and USDA to be audited because it is clear they are not doing the job of protecting the country from foreign-borne diseases.

I don't know whose idea it was to globalize, but that person deserves a huge head-spank for it. So far nothing good has come of it. We have lost jobs here in America, we have given a huge amount of money to the UN and for what, the quality of overseas products is substantially inferior to what America used to make, on and on I could go with that rant. Time to pull in! Go back to being for America first.

Write to your legislators in Congress and demand an audit of the FDA and USDA.

-----------------------------------
Imported food rarely inspected

By ANDREW BRIDGES, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - Just 1.3 percent of imported fish, vegetables, fruit and other foods are inspected — yet those government inspections regularly reveal food unfit for human consumption.

Frozen catfish from China, beans from Belgium, jalapenos from Peru, blackberries from Guatemala, baked goods from Canada, India and the Philippines — the list of tainted food detained at the border by the Food and Drug Administration stretches on.

Add to that the contaminated Chinese wheat gluten that poisoned cats and dogs nationwide and led to a massive pet food recall, and you've got a real international pickle. Does the United States have the wherewithal to ensure the food it imports is safe?

Food safety experts say no.

With only a minuscule percentage of shipments inspected, they say the nation is vulnerable to harm from abroad, where rules and regulations governing food production are often more lax than they are at home.

"FDA doesn't have enough resources or control over this situation presently," said Mike Doyle (news, bio, voting record), director of the University of Georgia's Center for Food Safety, which works with industry to improve safety.

Last month alone, FDA detained nearly 850 shipments of grains, fish, vegetables, nuts, spice, oils and other imported foods for issues ranging from filth to unsafe food coloring to contamination with pesticides to salmonella.

And that's with just 1.3 percent of the imports inspected. As for the other 98.7 percent, it's not inspected, much less detained, and goes to feed the nation's growing appetite for imported foods.

Each year, the average American eats about 260 pounds of imported foods, including processed, ready-to-eat products and single ingredients. Imports account for about 13 percent of the annual diet.

"Never before in history have we had the sort of system that we have now, meaning a globalization of the food supply," said Robert Brackett, director of the FDA's Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition.

FDA inspections focus on foods known to be at risk for contamination, including fish, shellfish, fruit and vegetables. Food from countries or producers previously shown to be problematic also are flagged for a closer look.

Consider this list of Chinese products detained by the FDA just in the last month: frozen catfish tainted with illegal veterinary drugs, fresh ginger polluted with pesticides, melon seeds contaminated with a cancer-causing toxin and filthy dried dates.

But even foods expected to be safe can harbor unexpected perils. Take wheat gluten: Grains and grain byproducts like it are rarely eaten raw and generally pose few health risks, since cooking kills bacteria and other pathogens.

Even so, the FDA can't say for sure whether the ingredient used in the pet foods was inspected after it arrived from China. And if the wheat gluten was, officials said, it wouldn't have been tested for melamine. Even though the chemical isn't allowed in food for pets or people, in any quantity, it previously wasn't believed toxic.

How did the melamine wind up in the wheat gluten? Investigators still don't know. Meanwhile, China is struggling to overhaul its food system and improve safety standards, but still faces major hurdles.

Farmers use pesticides and chemical fertilizers to build produce yields and antibiotics are used on seafood and livestock. Heavy metals also can be introduced into the food chain by widespread industrial pollution.

Increasingly, those foods are sold in a now global marketplace.

While the European Union, Canada and Mexico still top the list of food exporters to the U.S., China is coming up fast. Since 1997, the value of Chinese food imports, including commodities like wheat gluten, has more than tripled, to $2.1 billion from $644 million, according to Agriculture Department statistics. It accounts for 3.3 percent of the total food the U.S. buys abroad.

For suspect imported products — and wheat gluten is now one of them — the FDA issues alerts to its inspectors. The FDA flags Chinese food and other imported products it regulates, like cosmetics, for that extra scrutiny more than any other country except Mexico.

To safeguard its export business, China is looking at separating foods by their ultimate destination, domestic or foreign, according to Michiel Keyzer, director of the Center for World Food Studies at Amsterdam's Vrije Universiteit.

U.S. government statistics suggest China still has a way to go.

The FDA has been stopping Chinese food import shipments at the rate of about 200 per month this year. Shippers have the right to appeal the detentions, after which the government can order products returned or destroyed.

How do you know the origin of the food you eat? The 2002 Farm Act called for fish, fruit and vegetable imports to be labeled by country of origin, though implementation for the latter two foods has been delayed.

Meanwhile, the U.S. imports more and more, though the increase in value is partially due to the weaker dollar.

All told, the U.S. is expected to import a record $70 billion in agricultural products for the 12 months ending in September, according to an Agriculture Department forecast. The value of those imports will be about double the nearly $36 billion purchased overseas in 1997.

Contributing to that growth are the fresh fruits and vegetables imported during the offseason, when domestic production dwindles or ends.

About one-quarter of our fruit, both fresh and frozen, is imported. For tree nuts, it's about half. And for fish and shellfish, more than two-thirds come from overseas.

Even as the amount of imported food increased, the percentage of FDA inspections declined — from 1.8 percent in 2003 to 1.3 percent this year to an expected 1.1 percent next year.

"Inspections have a very important role but they're not the solution. They are the verification," FDA commissioner Dr. Andrew von Eschenbach said.

The FDA and the USDA have adopted a "risk-based" inspection philosophy, focusing on specific foods, sources or producers that they believe represent the largest potential risk to the public's health.

"The public at large is not at any increased risk," said Craig Henry, senior vice president and chief operating officer for scientific and regulatory affairs of the Grocery Manufacturers-Food Products Association, an industry group.

Caroline Smith DeWaal, director of food safety at the Center for Science in the Public Interest, an advocacy group, countered that "risk-based" is just shorthand for "reduced resources."

"Whenever they say 'risk-based approach,' it often means they don't have enough staff to actually do the job. They're doing triage. They're trying to hit what's most important to inspect but they're missing a lot," DeWaal said.

Groups lobbying to increase the FDA's budget say its spending on food safety has languished, despite the agency's outsized role in ensuring the safety of the nation's food supply.

A recent Government Accountability Office report noted that most of the $1.7 billion the federal government allocates to food safety goes to the USDA, which is responsible for regulating about 20 percent of the food supply. The FDA, responsible for most of the other 80 percent, gets about 24 percent of the total spent on food safety.

Unlike the FDA, the USDA requires foreign inspection certificates to accompany all products it regulates, which include meat and poultry. Those imports are then reinspected at each port of entry before they are allowed into this country — something that doesn't happen to all FDA-regulated imports.

Under the Bioterrorism Act of 2002, anyone importing food into the United States is required to notify the FDA of the shipment before it arrives by land, air or sea. That allows the FDA to intercept contaminated products before they reach the marketplace, though agency officials acknowledge it doesn't always work that way.

"We have better control than we did a few years ago but it is largely the responsibility of the importer to make sure those products are safe," said Stephen Sundlof, the FDA's top veterinarian.

ChemNutra Inc., the Las Vegas importer of the tainted wheat gluten, said it was "particularly troubled" that its supplier did not disclose it contained melamine.

Doyle, of the University of Georgia, warned the contaminated pet food could be an unsavory taste of what's to come.

"This is not the first and will not be the last but it certainly is a wakeup call for the public to get a better appreciation for where this country is going with imports and imported foods," Doyle said.

Brackett, the FDA official, said the globalization of the food supply means the agency is going to have to be more creative and strategic in ensuring its safety. "I am not quite sure how we're going to do that yet," he said, "except to know that that's the direction that we're going to be heading."

April 14, 2007

Another example of the USDA gone mad

The fact that APHIS has made statements regarding the insignificance of improper documentation accompanying imported Canadian cattle while holding Darrol Dickinson to another standard just proves to me that USDA and APHIS are being run by very bad people who don't know what their right or left hands are doing. And just that alone should cause everyone to demand that USDA/APHIS be investigated.

R-CALF United Stockgrowers of America


For Immediate Release Contact: Shae Dodson, Communications Coordinator

April 13, 2007 Phone: 406-672-8969;
e-mail: sdodson@r-calfusa.com

Group Questions USDA Enforcement Actions

Billings, Mont. – R-CALF USA is seeking information from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) on why it appears that agency officials describe incomplete paperwork on perhaps hundreds of imported Canadian cattle as “minor record-keeping problems,” yet initiate enforcement action against a U.S. cattle producer, claiming animals were transported in interstate commerce without a valid health certificate.

The U.S. producer in question is Darol Dickinson, owner of Dickinson Cattle Co. in Barnesville, Ohio. The event in question is the transport of a 6-year-old Texas Longhorn cow and a bull calf from Oklahoma to Ohio in January 2006. The veterinary health certificate – issued by the Oklahoma Department of Agriculture – states the identity of the pair as “Rosey Bark-B” and “Bull Calf at side” on the form under “EARTAG NO. OR OTHER OFFICIAL IDENTIFICATION, NAME OR DESCRIPTION.’

USDA correspondence to Dickinson dated Feb. 26, 2007, from the Investigative and Enforcement Services (IES) branch of USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) states that Dickinson transported the pair without a valid health certificate because “the consignee portion of the health certificate was incomplete and no official identification was listed for the cow.” The IES correspondence instructs Dickinson that he can waive his right to a hearing and settle the matter by paying a $1,250 penalty by March 26, 2007. If Dickinson does not request a hearing or pay the fine by said date, the IES letter states that litigation will result, and furthermore, “…The penalty offered in this Stipulation is not relevant to the sanctions APHIS may seek, or that will be assessed after issuance of a formal complaint…”

Dickinson maintains that all charges are false for the following reasons:

1) The animals were transported with an official Oklahoma State Health Certificate of Inspection prepared and signed by a USDA-licensed Oklahoma State Veterinarian.

2) Information for the Consignee portion of the health certificate was indeed complete for a resident of a small rural village.

3) All official identification for the cow was provided exactly as required by the printed form issued by the Oklahoma Department of Agriculture.

4) He relied on the USDA-licensed professional to properly execute the government form in its entirety.

5) The truck driver who transported the animals stopped at every port-of-entry crossing in every state required by law during the legal transport of these cattle.

6) The truck driver is not a USDA-licensed professional, and therefore, unable to evaluate the official veterinary health certificate for errors.

“Apparently, USDA doesn’t think the veterinarian who filled out the health certificate for these animals did so in a way USDA considers to be correct,” said R-CALF USA President/Region VI Director Max Thornsberry, a Missouri veterinarian who also chairs the R-CALF USA Animal Health Committee. “We have written a letter to Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns protesting that fine, particularly drawing attention to USDA’s comment that all the cattle coming in from Canada without proper paperwork was a simple, minor paperwork infraction.”

R-CALF USA sent the letter to Johanns on March 23, 2007, requesting that the fine immediately be rescinded. Only today did USDA confirm to R-CALF USA that an investigation is ongoing and that the results will be forthcoming in the near future.

“USDA’s citation against Dickinson Cattle Company appears to be discriminatory, based on recent statements to the media by APHIS officials regarding the insignificance of improper documentation accompanying imported Canadian cattle,” Thornsberry continued. “It appears APHIS is holding Dickinson Cattle Company to a much higher standard than it holds individuals or entities that authorize the transport of imported Canadian cattle, and this is patently wrong.”

On Feb. 23, 2007, the Chicago Tribune published an article by Washington Bureau Reporter Steve Hedges, with the headline “USDA: Mistakes tracing Canadian cattle are ‘minor’”. The piece quoted APHIS spokesperson Andrea McNally as characterising problems with the documentation of imported Canadian cattle as only “minor record-keeping problems.”

“If that’s USDA’s position, then the citation issued to Dickinson for transporting U.S. cattle within the United States is wholly unjustified and discriminatory,” Thornsberry asserted. “Based on our understanding of the circumstances, Dickinson’s documentation was in substantial compliance, if not complete compliance, with APHIS rules and regulations. R-CALF USA is requesting that USDA take steps to ensure that U.S. cattle producers are not discriminated against by being held to a higher standard than that imposed on individuals or entities handling imported cattle.

“This heavy-handed USDA enforcement action focuses only on whether an animal identification number was included in the documentation – it had nothing to do with the health of the animals in question,” Thornsberry concluded. “R-CALF USA is concerned that this situation may be indicative of the control USDA intends to exercise over U.S. cattle producers under it proposed National Animal Identification System. If this is the case, then the U.S. cattle industry would be subjected to an unacceptable level of regulatory control by USDA.”

Note: To view R-CALF USA’s letter, the veterinary health certificate, USDA’s correspondence to Dickinson and other supporting documents, visit the “Animal Health” link at www.r-calfusa.com.

# # #

R-CALF USA (Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal Fund, United Stockgrowers of America) is a national, non-profit organization and is dedicated to ensuring the continued profitability and viability of the U.S. cattle industry. R-CALF USA represents thousands of U.S. cattle producers on both domestic and international trade and marketing issues. Members are located across 47 states and are primarily cow/calf operators, cattle backgrounders, and/or feedlot owners. R-CALF USA has more than 60 affiliate organizations and various main-street businesses are associate members. For more information, visit www.r-calfusa.com or, call 406-252-2516.

April 12, 2007

North American Union from a Canadian perspective

I like the editorial comment at the end. "...and subject Canadians to a Christian far right..." Poor Canadians.

http://www.agoracosmopolitan.com/home/Frontpage/2007/04/10/01486.html

Globalists envision another 9/11 crisis as great for creating climate for North American Union

Destruction of the popular sovereignty of Canadians, Americans, and Mexicans is "just a crisis away"

by Jerome R. Corsi, WND Columnist

Robert Pastor, a leading intellectual force in the move to create a North American Union, told WND he believes a new 9/11 crisis could be the catalyst to merge the U.S., Mexico and Canada.

Mr. Pastor, a professor at American University, says that in such a case the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, or SPP - launched in 2005 by the heads of the three countries at a summit in Waco, Texas - could be developed into a continental union, complete with a new currency, "the Amero", that would replace the U.S. dollar just as the euro has replaced the national currencies of Europe.

In May 2005, Pastor was co-chairman the Council on Foreign Relations task force that produced a report entitled "Toward a North American Community," which he has claimed is the blueprint behind the SSP declared by President Bush, Mexico's then-President Vicente Fox, and Canada's then-Prime Minister Paul Martin.

At American University in Washington, D.C., Pastor directs the Center for North American Studies where he teaches a course entitled "North America: A Union, A Community, or Just Three Nations?" As WND previously has reported, Pastor is on the board of the North American Forum on Integration, the NAFI, a non-profit organization that annually holds a mock trilateral parliament for 100 selected students drawn from 10 universities in the U.S., Canada and Mexico.

Mr. Pastor had published an interview in Spanish in the Oct. 24 issue of Poder y Negocios. He told the magazine crises can force decisions that otherwise would not be made.

"The 9/11 crisis made Canada and the United States redefine the protection of their borders," Pastor explained. "The debt crisis in Mexico forced the government to adapt a new economic model. Crises oblige governments to make difficult decisions."

This was the first time WND had found a major intellectual leader behind the push to integrate North America suggesting that a crisis of 9-11 proportions might be just what was needed to advance the process toward establishing a North American Union and the "Amero". Professor Pastor along with the U.S. Bush administration envisions that "the "Amero" will replace the Canadian Dollar (along with the current currencies of the United States. and Mexico). WND reached Pastor in his office at American University and conducted a telephone interview to make sure the Spanish publication accurately reflected his views.

He affirmed the Spanish interview represents his thinking.

"What I'm saying is that a crisis is an event which can force democratic governments to make difficult decisions like those that will be required to create a North American Community," he said. "It's not that I want another 9/11 crisis, but having a crisis would force decisions that otherwise might not get made."

Editorial note:

The North American Union (NAU) would destroy and replace Canada, and subject Canadians to a Christian far right, neo-fascistic, and anti-democratic political-military-industrial complex toward a sought Orwellian "New World Order".