R-CALF Wins Major Animal ID Dispute; USDA Cancels Mandatory Premises Registration Directive

R-CALF United Stockgrowers of America “Fighting for the U.S. Cattle Producer"

For Immediate Release Contact: Shae Dodson, Communications Coordinator

December 29, 2008
Phone: 406-672-8969;
e-mail: sdodson@r-calfusa.com

Group Wins Major Animal ID Dispute;

USDA Cancels Mandatory Premises Registration Directive

Billings, Mont. – Just over a month after R-CALF USA sent a formal letter to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service-Veterinary Services (APHIS-VS) demanding that the agency retract Memorandum No. 575.19 issued on Sept. 22, 2008, APHIS-VS officially canceled that particular memo on Dec. 22, 2008.

Memorandum 575.19 mandated premises registration under the National Animal Identification System (NAIS) for producers engaged in interstate commerce and who participate in any one of the dozen or more federally regulated disease programs.

R-CALF USA told the agency in its Nov. 10, 2008, letter that the memo “constitutes an unlawful, final regulatory action initiated and implemented without public notice or opportunity for comment, as required by the Administrative Procedure Act,” and must be retracted.

“We caught USDA in the unlawful act of trying to convert what was promised to be a completely voluntary animal identification system into a mandatory NAIS, and the agency backed down,” said R-CALF USA President/Region VI Director Max Thornsberry, a Missouri veterinarian who also chairs the group’s animal health committee. “This goes to show how an organized group of cattle producers can effectively defend their rights if they stand and fight together.”

The cancellation memorandum issued by APHIS-VS on Dec. 22, 2008, states, “VS Memorandum No. 575.19 dated September 22, 2008, is hereby canceled.”

“This action by USDA confirms what we’ve been saying all along – that USDA does not have the authority to implement NAIS and it is using underhanded and unlawful methods to coerce independent cattle producers into giving up their rights to their property,” said Kenny Fox, who chairs the group’s animal identification committee.

“R-CALF USA encourages producers to not register their premises under the NAIS and to immediately request that their names and property be removed from the NAIS database if they had previously registered under USDA’s coercive actions,” Fox urged.

The new APHIS-VS memo further states that APHIS-VS “has an established procedure for producers who request their premises record be removed from the NAIS premises databases.”

R-CALF USA advocates that USDA should use and improve existing disease traceback methods including state-sanctioned brand programs that do not require individual producers to register their property under a national premises registration program in order to improve USDA’s disease traceback capabilities.

“There is no need to violate producers’ private property rights to accomplish this objective, and R-CALF will continue to work with Congress and USDA to improve our existing systems, but we will not tolerate the type of government intrusion on our industry that USDA envisioned with NAIS,” Fox concluded.

Note: To view/download R-CALF USA’s letter or the new APHIS-VS memorandum, please visit the “Animal Identification” link at www.r-calfusa.com or contact R-CALF USA Communications Coordinator Shae Dodson to request copies.

# # #

R-CALF USA (Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal Fund, United Stockgrowers of America) is a national, non-profit organization 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 trade and marketing issues. Members are located acrss 47 states and are primarily cow/calf operators, cattle backgrounders, and/or feedlot owners. R-CALF USA has dozens of affiliate organizations and various main-street businesses are associate members. R-CALF USA directors and committee chairs are extremely active unpaid volunteers. For more information, visit www.r-calfusa.com or, call 406-252-2516.

Oh, Vanity! Death be thy name

Cure yourself of the affliction of caring how you appear to others. Concern yourself only with how you appear before God, concern yourself only with the idea that God may have of you. ~Miguel De Unamuno

FDA approves Allergan's drug for longer eyelashes

BOSTON (Reuters) - Allergan Inc, the maker of Botox, said on Friday that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has approved its eyelash-thickening drug Latisse.

Latisse is designed to treat a condition known as hypotrichosis of the eyelashes, which means a person does not have enough eyelashes.

The active ingredient in Latisse is bimatroprost, the same ingredient that is in Allergan's glaucoma treatment Lumigan. Patients taking Lumigan found a side effect of the drug to be eyelash growth, prompting Allergan to study it for the new use. Read the rest here.

How many people will line up to get this product? Honestly, what is wrong with this world? Have you see then television ad for "prescription strength deoderant"? It helps keep your underarms soft. Gosh. What kind of a world are our young women coming into where they think they might be judged for sparse eyelashes and rough underarms?

The best Christmas present of all

Matthew 1:21 -And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.

Dear Reader,

I hope you will reflect on the gift that God wants to give you this Christmas season. He wants to have a friendship with you, to be your God and for you to be one of his people. All you have to do is to ask Him to come into your heart and your life. God so loves people that He gave His only begotten son, the only perfect-without-sin person who ever lived, so that we, sinners all, could be reconciled and have life. To be in sin, and every single one of us is a sinner, means to be dead spiritually. Accept Jesus and have life.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you all!

Henny

The Stowers tell their story

See my earlier post here urging farmers to carry video tapes with them so they don't end up like the Stowers of LaGrange, OH, who were invaded by the jackboots of the Department of Health.

Now see the YouTube video of them telling their story.



I ask you this... people have the right to consume cheap and crappy food from WallyMart, why don't other people have the right to consume locally grown and produced food? What is wrong with this country? What is wrong with USDA?

Under What Authority Can USDA Impose Premises Registration?

This is a question I have been asking for quite a few years. In truth, they have no authority under the Constitution.



Billings, Mont. – R-CALF USA got word today that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has received a formal letter from the group that requests the agency to promptly answer several questions regarding R-CALF USA’s position that USDA has no authority to impose premises registration – utilizing the National Animal Identification System (NAIS) – onto livestock producers who participate in federal disease management programs.

“The NAIS, as proposed by your agency, is shrouded with inconsistency and uncertainty,” wrote R-CALF USA President/Region VI Director Max Thornsberry, who also chairs the group’s animal health committee.

“For example, your agency continues to publicly claim NAIS is completely a voluntary program, though it has simultaneously issued an official memorandum to state animal health officials directing them to register as a premises the real property of certain livestock producers – regardless of whether these livestock producers consent to the imposition of such registration,” the letter continues.

The letter requests USDA to state what authority it has to register real property as a premises and implement NAIS and also requests a complete disclosure by USDA regarding the potential ramifications of NAIS participation.

Some of the questions include:

* What is the specific authority that grants USDA the power to register personal real estate as a premises without prior consent, power of attorney in fact, or by persons lacking legal age or capacity?

* Does registration of real property as a premises become a permanent assignment to the affected property?

* Does registration of real property as a premises constitute a taking as defined in the 5th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution?

* Will those affected by premises registration of real property be compensated for any taking, in what amount, by what standard of evaluation, and frequency?

* Does an agency memorandum, on premises registration of real property, stand as an act of law?

* Where, by an Act of Congress as legislated within the bounds of Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, has USDA been given authority to register real property as a premises or otherwise implement the National Animal Identification System?

* Where in the U.S. Constitution is USDA given authority to register real property as a premises or otherwise implement the National Animal Identification System?

* Will future land title and use of private real estate be impacted by implementation of the National Animal Identification System, resulting in further Federal regulation or authority?

“If your agency intends to proceed with its implementation of the NAIS proposal, including premises registration of real property, the cattle-producing members of R-CALF USA, who are directly affected by NAIS, deserve to know the specific authority underpinning your agency’s actions, as well as the potential ramifications from participating in the NAIS,” Thornsberry concluded in the letter.

R-CALF USA Animal Identification Committee Chair Kenny Fox praised committee members for the time and research they put into drafting this letter and said he hopes USDA will finally admit the agency has absolutely no authority to implement NAIS.

“USDA says publicly NAIS is a voluntary system, but their actions prove otherwise,” said Fox. “There’s a reason the agency chose to use the word ‘premises’ instead of ‘property,’ especially when you consider that producers’ information already is available to USDA. If NAIS becomes the law of the land, you can bet that registering your premises is the first step to ceding your authority over to the government when it comes to your business operations.”

Note: To view/download this letter in its entirety, please visit the “Animal ID” link at www.r-calfusa.com.

# # #

R-CALF USA (Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal Fund, United Stockgrowers of America) is a national, non-profit organization 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 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 directors and committee chairs are extremely active unpaid volunteers. R-CALF USA has dozens of affiliate organizations and various main-street businesses are associate members. For more information, visit www.r-calfusa.com, or, call 406-252-2516.

R-CALF: Producers' Interests Represented At Obama-Biden Agriculture Transition Team Meeting

It is about time that R-CALF got a seat at the big table. No other organization represents the rights of animal producers, not the rights of industry. Atta boy, Bill and Kenny!


12/10/2008 1:10:00 PM

R-CALF: Producers' Interests Represented At Obama-Biden Agriculture Transition Team Meeting

Washington, D.C. – R-CALF USA was one of about 25 agricultural organizations invited to participate in a meeting here Monday in which the goal was to recommend to the Agriculture Secretary-designee reforms to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) once President-elect Barack Obama takes office in January 2009.

“The Obama-Biden Transition Team is putting together a briefing paper to give to whomever Obama selects to be the next Secretary of Agriculture, and that person will use the briefing paper as a starting point with regard to what needs to be changed within USDA first,” said R-CALF USA CEO Bill Bullard, who represented the group at the meeting. “Besides the necessary changes to USDA, the focus of the meeting also was to discuss what the new Agriculture Secretary will need to do immediately to begin to implement and accomplish what Obama said he would do during his election campaign.”

Bullard pointed out that the recommendations by R-CALF USA would allow the largest segment of U.S. agriculture – the U.S. live cattle industry – to help rebuild rural economies in the U.S. because profitable U.S. cattle operations equate to economic growth and stability for those rural communities.

“R-CALF was the only organization participating at the meeting that exclusively represents the U.S. live cattle industry,” Bullard concluded. “We are pleased that R-CALF is recognized as an agricultural leader in Washington by the new Administration, and we think that’s going to help us considerably in achieving the membership directives of our organization.”

R-CALF USA recommended that the new USDA make the following changes within the four USDA departments that impact the U.S. live cattle industry:

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS)

Immediately rescind APHIS’ over-30-month rule (OTM Rule) that allows the importation of cattle and beef from Canadian cattle that have a higher risk for bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE). In R-CALF USA et al, vs. USDA, the U.S. District Court ordered USDA to reopen its OTM Rule, and the public comment period for the court-ordered rulemaking closed on Nov. 17, 2008.

Immediately halt APHIS’ efforts to impose a one-size-fits-all National Animal Identification System (NAIS) program on U.S. livestock producers and redirect all funds presently used for this purpose to encourage state animal health officials and Tribes to improve their livestock traceback capabilities by improving existing disease control systems, such as the brucellosis surveillance program.

Promulgate regulations to require APHIS to assist private persons to voluntarily test for diseases such as BSE.

Reaffirm, by regulatory action, APHIS’ congressional mandate to prevent the “introduction” of foreign animal diseases like BSE and foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) into the United States. APHIS has defied this mandate in its OTM Rule by establishing a much weaker standard – that of preventing the “establishment” of foreign animal diseases in the United States after they are allowed to be introduced.

Require APHIS to conduct both quantitative and qualitative risk assessments when determining the risk of introducing foreign animal diseases into the United States from foreign countries.

Require countries with ongoing BSE outbreaks to test all animals over 30 months of age as a precondition to allowing trade in cattle and beef.

Reverse APHIS’ relatively recent “regionalization” regulations that would conceivably allow the importation of animals and meat from countries with ongoing disease outbreaks by regionalizing, or carving out, specific areas within the disease-affected country. Regionalization would greatly increase the risk of introducing foreign animal diseases into the United States.

Reaffirm, by regulatory action, the policy that the United States will only import animals and meat products from countries that are free of foreign animal diseases not indigenous to the United States, or that have been effectively controlled or eradicated within the United States.

Immediately rescind APHIS’ policy of requiring mandatory premises registration and NAIS participation for any livestock producer involved in a federal disease program and/or who also ships livestock in interstate commerce.

Rescind APHIS’ recent rule that relaxed the requirement that live animals imported from countries with ongoing disease problems be permanently branded with a brand denoting the animal’s country-of-origin. APHIS has relaxed this requirement and now allows the use of tattoos, which makes it difficult to distinguish cattle imported from countries with ongoing disease problems.

Food Safety Inspection Service (FSIS)

Fully restore the regulatory requirement that foreign meatpacking establishments maintain food safety and food safety inspection standards identical to or equal to United States’ standards, thus reversing the relatively recent revision that requires only a standard of equivalency for foreign meatpacking plants.

Fully restore the regulatory requirement that foreign meatpacking establishments receive food safety inspections on a monthly basis, thus reversing the relatively recent revision that requires only periodic inspections of foreign meatpacking plants.

Amend regulations to require traceability of pathogens such as E. coli O157:H7 back to the slaughterhouse where the contaminated meat was fabricated, thus enabling the identification of the source of the contaminant, not just the processing plant that subsequently and unknowingly further distributed the contaminated product.

Amend the HACCP (Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points) regulations to strengthen FSIS’ control, oversight, and enforcement of food safety standards in U.S. slaughtering plants. The self-enforcement policy underpinning the current HACCP program is inadequate to ensure compliance with food safety requirements.

Promulgate rules to implement the 2008 Farm Bill language that allows state-inspected meat plants to engage in interstate commerce. The rules should be written both to facilitate and to simplify access to interstate commerce by state-inspected plants, while ensuring the safety and wholesomeness of meat products produced by such plants.

Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS)

Modify the interim final rule for country-of-origin labeling (COOL) to prohibit the use of a mixed-origin label on meat from animals exclusively born, raised, and slaughtered in the United States; amend the definition of processed foods to include cooked products under the labeling requirements; shorten the time period to one week that a country’s name may be included on ground meat labels after the packer or processor ceases sourcing raw product from that country; disallow a mixed-origin sign on meat cases that also contain USA meat; and, disallow the retention of the USA label for products that are exported and then re-imported prior to sale to the final consumer.

Require all imported livestock to bear a permanent mark of origin as a condition of entry into the United States, which can be accomplished by removing livestock from the U.S. Department of Treasury’s so-called “J-list.”

Amend the regulations for mandatory price reporting to achieve greater transparency of livestock market prices as recommended by the Government Accountability Office (GAO).

Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA)

Promulgate rules to define “undue or unreasonable preference or advantage” as required by the 2008 Farm Bill.

Adopt the 2006 recommendations of the USDA Office of Inspector General (OIG) that found GIPSA had not properly enforced the Packers and Stockyards Act for many years.

Promulgate rules, or encourage through statute, a prohibition on packer ownership of livestock more than 14 days prior to slaughter.

Prohibit packers from procuring cattle through formula-type contracts that currently allow meatpackers to procure cattle prior to slaughter without negotiating a fixed base price for cattle.

Change.org

While it does make me feel icky to be playing over on Change.org, I would like to point out that there is a section that tries to make NAIS an issue. Stop NAIS

May I ask you to go there and register so that you can make a comment about how bad NAIS is for the country? It is rather depressing to see so few comments when we know there are well over 10,000 of us fighting NAIS tooth and nail.


Thanks.

Farmers, carry a video camera with you. It has come to that

Swat Team conducts food raid in rural Ohio

Folks, we are living in perilous times. It is OK to have some small parts per million of Chinese sourced melamine in baby formula, but by God, just try to buy local food, or raw milk, and the Feds and local goons descend on you like a ton of bricks.

The story above is about heavy handed tactics, including a SWAT team, on a local food coop in Ohio. The SWAT team kept the family, including the children, under gun point for some 7 hours while they rifled their house and personal possessions and took things that were not listed on the warrant. All this while the woman's husband is serving in Iraq. Read the whole story here.

Surprise, surprise, there is hardly any local news about the incident.

Read David Gumpert's blog, the complete patient, for more incidents like this. These things are mounting as industrialized agriculture and it's whoreish partner, USDA, begin to realize that people are interested in real food that is healthy.

I include a comment from the linked website by Mark MacAfee, owner of Organic Pastures Dairy in California, because it contains important information for farmers who find themselves looking down the barrel of a gun or at the face of an inspector or other bootjack.

All farmers should now carry video cameras and be ready to use them when they are attacked or their homes are occupied by swat teams and government thugs.

The media loves juicy footage. I guarantee that these criminals will lose their jobs and perhaps even have charges brought against them….

Video is the strongest thing we have…the next strongest is the http://www.ftcldf.com

Gary Cox esq. can use this video to bring them to justice….make sure you tell your story. Stay peaceful and let the otther side fall into the quicksand.

Where is the national media on this???? This is an outrage!!

Mark McAfee
Founder OPDC

The Scam behind NAIS

The SCAM behind NAIS~~~
"Our Land: Collateral for the National Debt"

by Derry Brownfield Dec. 3,2008


I consider Wayne Hage one of the most intelligent men I ever met. On our very first visit he was explaining the World Bank, the International Monetary fund and how the world bankers planned on collateralizing the world debt with land. Not just the U.S. national debt, but also the "WORLD" debt. A listener sent me a copy of a report of the FOURTH WORLD WILDERNESS CONGRESS, which was held in Denver in 1987. Over 1500 people from sixty countries were told that wilderness lands were to protect the reindeer, the spotted owl and other endangered species. Ninety percent of the group consisted of conservationists, ecologists, government and United Nations bureaucrats. The other ten percent were world banking heavyweights, such as David Rockefeller of Chase Manhattan Bank, London banker Edmund de Rothschild and the Secretary of the U.S. Treasury, James Baker, who gave the keynote address. George W. Hunt, an investment councilor, served as official host and sat in on all the meetings. It was George Hunt that wrote the report from which I have gleaned much of my information.

NAIS CONCEIVED IN 1987

During the first three days, the group was told that the WILDERNESS CONGRESS was about beating the ozone deterioration and bringing the rain forests back. The following days were closed to the public. With only the bankers in attendance, the topics discussed centered on the creation of a "WORLD CONSERVATION BANK" with collateral being derived from receipt of wilderness properties throughout the world. This bank would have central bank powers similar to the Federal Reserve. It would create currency and loans and engage in international discounting, counter-trade, barter and swap actions. Rothschild personally conducted the monetary matters and the creation of this WORLD CONSERVATION BANK. This bank would refinance by swapping debt for assets. A country with a huge national debt would receive money to pay off the debt by swapping the debt for wilderness lands. The plan was to swap one trillion dollars of Third World Debt into this new bank. In the long term, when the countries won't be able to pay off the loans, governments from around the world will give title to their wilderness lands to the bankers.

WHY A BROKE GOVERNMENT KEEPS BUYING LAND FROM PRIVATE OWNERS?

George Hunt wrote: "Title to the lands will go to the World Wilderness Land Inventory Trust. This Trust will float into the World Conservation Bank by the unanimous decree of the world's people, saying, God bless you for saving our reindeer. Those people at the congress were ignorant. They don't suspect anything. They're very naive. Not stupid, ignorant. I'm talking about the 90% that were not the world banking heavyweights."

Hunt goes on to say that World Bank loans, as they stand now, are not collateralized. They're saying, we want collateral, so when we loan-swap this debt, we're going to own the Amazon if you default. They're going to make their bad loans good by collateralizing them after the fact with all of this land and somebody is going to end up with title to twelve and half billion acres. They have multi-trillions of dollars upon which they can create currencies and loans and they're going to begin to barter and counter-trade and loan-swap against the United States. The World Conservation Bank is a scheme to monetize land. This will function as a world central bank and out of that bank there will grow a one-world fiat currency.

This isn't some scheme conjured up during the Bush and Clinton administrations. The United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development was created in 1982. The commission published the "BRUNDTLAND REPORT," setting the stage for unlimited enactments to take over ecology, and environmental and pollution laws throughout the world. The report stated: "We will have a proposal for very harsh, quasi-spiritual ecological laws for MOTHER EARTH. A MOTHER EARTH COMES FIRST mentality will arise throughout the world."

DEBT COLLATERALIZATION IN THE HEARTLAND

When James Baker made his keynote speech in 1987, he stated that, "No longer will the World Bank carry this debt unsecured. The only assets we have to collateralize are federal lands and national parks." Baker's definition of federal lands includes Heritage sites, of which there are about 20 in the United States. I say "about" 20, because they are being added on a regular basis. As I write this article, Congress is about to vote on a proposed Rim of the Valley National Park that would include over 500,000 acres of National Forest land and 170,000 parcels of private property including many farms and ranches. At the same time there is a bill before Congress called the Northern Rockies Ecosystem Protection Act that would increase the acreage of designated wilderness by 50% in the lower 48 states. *** While our Heritage sites take in quite a large amount of territory, such as Yellowstone National Park and Mesa Verde, the Grand Canyon and the Everglades, other countries have much greater areas. Brazil for example has the Amazon Conservation Complex and Canada has the Canadian Rocky Mountain Parks. As I write this story, the list includes 851 properties in 141 countries, comprising over one third of the earth's land mass. Will all this land collateralize the world's debt? Probably not, so along comes NAIS (the National Animal Identification System).

WHO MAKES THE RULES---WHO ENFORCES?

According to the United States Department of Agriculture, "The first step in implementing a national animal identification system (NAIS) is identifying and registering premises that are associated with the animal agriculture industry. In terms of the NAIS, a premise is any geographically unique location in which agricultural animals are raised, held, or boarded. Under this definition, farms, ranches, feed-yards, auction barns and livestock exhibitions and fair sites are all examples of premises." That may be the definition some government bureaucrat will give you, but the word "premises" under the "international Criminal Court Act 2002- Sect 4, states: The word "premises" includes a place and a "conveyance." Why check with the International Criminal Court Act? Because on June 8, 2007, Under-Secretary of Agriculture Bruce Knight, speaking at the World Pork Expo in Des Moines, Iowa, is quoted as saying, "We have to live by the same international rules we're expecting other people to do."

Throughout the entire Draft National Animal Identification System Users Guide, land is referred to as a premises and not property. A "Premises" has no protection under the Constitution of the United States, while property always has the exclusive rights of the owner tied to it. The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution protect property rights.

WHAT IS A PREMISE---WHY WAS PREMISE USED INSTEAD OF PROPERTY?

The word "Premise" is a synonym for the word tenement. A definition of the word tenement in law is: Property, such as land, held by one person "leasing" it to another. Webster's New World Dictionary 1960 College Edition defines "Premises" as the part of a deed or "lease" that states its reason, the parties involved and the property in "conveyance." Webster then defines "conveyance" as the transfer of ownership of real property from one person to another. It is quite obvious that the bureaucrats in Washington had a very good reason to use the term "premises" and never mention "PROPERTY."

Let's take another look at the wilderness areas and the World Bank's plans to collateralize its loans. While the wilderness areas cover about one third of the earth's surface, they are wilderness areas for a good reason – they were useless or difficult to homestead, farm or use in a constructive manner. Worldwide, the best and more valuable land is occupied by farmers, ranchers and people with the ambition to produce. Wouldn't the World Bankers rather have some productive property besides mountains, deserts and swamps?

I am convinced that the word "premise" will put an encumbrance on your deed. The bankers say they want to monetize land. It's your land and my land they want to monetize.

WHAT IS THE HISTORICAL METHOD?

The bankers are in the process of accumulating the wealth of the world. Very few privately owned assets can be termed "real wealth." According to scripture, God made Abraham very wealthy, giving him LAND, CATTLE, silver and gold. (Genesis 24:35) Four thousand years later, wealth continues to be LAND, CATTLE, silver and gold. I don't know where the world deposits of silver and gold are stored, but I'm sure the bankers have them in their control. That only leaves LAND and CATTLE, which I believe could be next on the list. Genesis 47 describes how Joseph had storehouses full of grain to feed the people, but he didn't have a welfare program. During the first year of the famine, Joseph took "ALL THE MONEY" the people had for only one year's supply of grain. The second year he took all their cattle for another year's supply of grain. The next year they said, "We have nothing left but our bodies and our land. Buy us and our land in exchange for food and we and our land will be servants to Pharaoh." Genesis 47:21 states, "And as for the people, he removed them to the cities and made slaves of them."

NAIS--OF LAND FEDERALIZATION

James Madison made a statement concerning how our people could lose our freedom by gradual and silent encroachment by those in power. Is it possible that those in power today are gradually and silently in the process of removing the people to the cities to make slaves of them? Federalizing our land and our cattle would certainly be a step in that direction.


***Derry Brownfield, legendary cattleman, rancher and talk radio host, is heard daily across America bringing his common sense approach to listeners. The farmers’ champion and a passionate constitutionalist, Derry takes on big government, mega-corporations, and environmental extremists. From the stock market to the stock yards, from greedy oil companies to the everyday concerns of his loyal audience, no topic is too hot to handle for Derry, who is called “the voice of the heartland”.

www.DerryBrownfield.com/