Post Menopausal Ponderings

So You Think Your Activist Organization Is Really On Your Side?

2010-12-01T13:33:00.000-05:00

Just finished another round of fighting S510. What a confounding mess that was. Worked a week solid to rouse support from my many networks to ask their Senators to vote the thing down. What I knew hardly ever meshed up with what the 'activists organizations' were saying. And that Tester amendment, later called the Tester-Hagen amendment, that sure was a line drawn in the shifting sands. Those activist/policy groups supported the amendment from the get-go, never mind that is was a worthless piece of poo when held up to these words in the bill:

Nothing in this Act (or an amendment made by this Act) shall be construed in a manner inconsistent with the agreement establishing the World Trade Organization or any other treaty or international agreement to which the United States is a party.

Here's some background info on the Tester Amendment that was posted to one of these policy setting activist groups that I am complaining about.

Senator Jon Tester has reached an agreement with the managers of S.510 to include a new, compromise version of the amendment in the Senate food safety bill.

The agreed-upon amendment exempts producers who gross under $500,000 and who sell more than half their products directly to consumers or local restaurants and retailers from the HARCP and produce safety standards provisions.

As part of the compromise, "local" restaurants and retailers are defined as those who are either in-state or within 275 miles of the producer. (the earlier version of the amendment had allowed for up to 400 miles)

The compromise also added language that gives FDA authority to withdraw an exemption from a farm or facility that has been associated with a foodborne illness outbreak.

The amendment text and a summary are posted on Senator Tester's website: http://tester.senate.gov/Legislation/foodsafety.cfm

How many times is compromise used? That's what it is all about, compromise. These activist groups will not stand firm for the truth, in this case, S510 is going to hurt small farmers. Period.

This morning the emails are ablaze with information about S510 and I haven't seen much that is actually accurate. Just in, one from Alliance for Natural Health USA that addresses the current situation, S510 is dead in the water.

What I have learned is that the policy/activist groups I am talking about here (and I'm sure you belong to one or two, get newsletters from more than a few of them) are in business for one reason and one reason only....to pick and choose from a variety of issues that have grassroots interest the ones that they know they can win (or make a lot of winning noises about) so that they can keep themselves going and look good in the process. The Raw Milk bill here in Vermont is a perfect example of that. And while the fight over S510 was going on, these groups continued to offer on-farm slaughter clinics, raw cheese making classes, and courses on how to get grants to start your own CSA.

I'd like to list these groups for you, but I won't. Just pay attention to the organizations you belong to and watch them like a hawk. Do they really represent your interests or are they compromise makers?

Pre-emptive Cauliflower - Won't you join us?

2010-11-23T19:43:00.001-05:00

Long time no post, but this is an emergency

2010-11-01T20:23:00.000-04:00

Hello Followers! I'm back to update you about this terrible situation.

Morningland Dairy and Estrella Family Creamery are being kicked around by the FDA. If you will, click through here to the blog devoted to Morningland Dairy, and then here, for the blog for Estrella.

At this moment, you can donate to the charitable relief fund for the Dixons at Morningland. By the beginning of the week, you'll be able to donate to the Estrellas. If you would be so kind, grab the Pledgie badge and put it on your blog, website, forums, etc.

Any further posting about this will be found on http://uncheeseparty.wordpress.com/

See you there!

Books I've read lately

2010-03-05T14:32:00.001-05:00

My daughter just finished her internship at Milkweed Editions and as a thank you they gave her 6 books. She thought of me and got Driftless by David Rhodes for me. It is probably the best book I've read in 10 years.

Review from Good Reads

The few hundred souls who inhabit Words, Wisconsin, are an extraordinary cast of characters. The middle-aged couple who zealously guards their farm from a scheming milk cooperative. The lifelong invalid, crippled by conflicting emotions about her sister. A cantankerous retiree, haunted by childhood memories after discovering a cougar in his haymow. The former drifter who forever alters the ties that bind a community. In his first novel in 30 years, David Rhodes offers a vivid and unforgettable look at life in small-town America.

My next pick for you is by Gwen Santagate, 10 Secrets to Healthy Hooves. If you have a horse, or horses, it is in your best interest to know everything you can about hooves. This book is available on Kindle from Amazon or from Gwen's website, Barefoot Trim.

And, of course, my novel, First They Came for the Cows. I sent copies to Senator Patrick Leahy, Dr. Neil Hammerschmidt, and Secretary Tom Vilsack.

Global Agreements Create Domestic Disturbance

2010-02-19T15:39:00.000-05:00

Conference Call Seminar with Doreen Hannes, Truth Farmer

"Global Agreements Create Domestic Disturbance"

March 4, 2010

Register now, space for attendance is limited!

In the interest of educating and uniting those concerned with agriculture and the local food movement on what is happening because of the United States participation in the World Trade Organization, Doreen Hannes, the Truth Farmer (www.libertynewsradio.com), will be holding a conference-call seminar on March 4th at 1 PM/CST, titled "Global Agreements Create Domestic Disturbance". This presentation is an expanded version of what Doreen gave at the R-Calf USA annual convention in late January. Open to all who are interested in learning more about the current and future impacts of these international guidelines on domestic agricultural endeavors. It is important for all to understand how the details of these global agreements and our market structure work together in order to determine how to best fight for food freedom within our nation and our states. The Congressional push for additional "Food Safety" (S. 510, HR 2749) legislation will neither increase food safety nor will any exemptions for direct marketing have lasting positive effects for the local food movement.

A Power Point presentation will be sent to all participants along with additional educational materials and seminar instructions. The seminar will consist of an approximately 45 minute presentation followed by a Q and A session.

A free-will donation of $20.00 is appreciated. PayPal payment information will be provided in your confirmation email. Limited spaces on the conference call. Register now by emailing henwhisperer@gmail.com

Dairy Daze in Vermont

2010-02-14T08:48:00.002-05:00

I had the dubious pleasure of sitting in the front row in Burlington, Vermont yesterday at a town hall type meeting with Sec'y Vilsack, Senators Leahy and Sanders, and Representative Welch. The topic at hand was the dairy crisis. After an hour and a half of speeching by grand poobahs, and pleas of help by the peons and subsidy takers, Senator Sanders said they were out of time for questions.

There was a moment of quiet as gears shifted, so I, being me, leapt to my feet and said, "Mr. Vilsack, I want to thank you for stopping the National Animal Identification System." He was looking in my direction until I said that and then his eyes dropped to some important work he had left unfinished, I guess, because he started writing. He never looked at me again, nor lifted his eyes as he said, "Yes, we have decided to leave those folks who want to raise a few chickens out of the equation." "You mean that fastest growing segment of agriculture," I asked him, "those who make less than $10,000 a year?" He had spoken earlier about the NASS survey and how that segment is growing faster than any other segment in agriculture. Maybe he read or heard Doreen [See Easter Bunny Reports NAIS is Dead!] recently...heh...

Bernie Sanders was looking at me though, giving me 'grandpa winks', you know, high fives with the eyes. He was so approving of me.

I was wearing the last "Know Your Chicken" button, and so, me being me, began to unfasten it from my sweater with an American flag on the front, and said, "This is a historical button and I'd like to give it to you. I wore it at every NAIS meeting I went to." He still did not look at me as I stepped forward and placed it on the podium. "It says, Know Your Chicken." Some of my friends in the audience laughed, and then everyone laughed. I sat down. He still wouldn't look at me.

Bernie Sanders stopped giving me 'grandpa winks' then. His face turned bright red, even his ears.

People were shuffling around trying to either exit or get closer to the Men. I noticed that Mr. Vilsack had not picked up the button, so I went up to a large, linebacker sized black man who seemed to be in charge of Mr. Vilsack. I said to him, "If Mr. Vilsack isn't going to take that button, I want it back. It is historical." "I'll make sure he takes it," he said. He gave me one of his business cards asking me if I would email him my name, etc. I found his name to be quite interesting...Malcolm X.

Some of the other stuff I noticed: Leaky Leahy called Vilsack Secretary Obey. Bernie Sanders said that no other Sec'y of Ag had come to Vermont before. Leaky Leahy said that 3 others had. Vilsack said that we export more than we import. Leahy said, "So many of you that I talk with on the phone or my office does, you have all had that opportunity to be, to have that connection. That means a lot to just see you here." I video'd most of the event and I transcribed it right off the raw video.

As for the dairy industry in Vermont or anywhere, they're sunk. As one dairyman put it, "We've had a hundred of these meetings and nothing changes."

[Update 15 Feb. 2010]

USDA ANNOUNCES NEW FRAMEWORK FOR ANIMAL DISEASE TRACEABILITY

2010-02-05T20:24:00.000-05:00

It all started this morning with a New York Times piece, USDA Abandons Stalled Animal ID Program. Then we found the USDA Press Release. And then, eventually, the Questions and Answers: New Animal Disease Traceability Framework (a PDF, so save it to your desktop).

The words, and never ever forget they choose words on purpose, make it sound like they are backing way off, but, sorry, I'm way too skeptical to believe it. Did they hear the folks who showed up at the listening sessions last year? Oh yeah, they heard us. But are they really backing off? Snort.

Something else to never forget is that full traceability is required by WHO, OIE, the UN, and the Guide to Good Farming Practices.

Well, we'll be watching the Federal Register like hawks waiting to see how long it takes USDA to make changes to the Code and watching elsewhere for new documents. If any of you fine followers come across new documents, let me know.

If NAIS is unfamiliar to you, buy my novel, First They Came for the Cows: An Activist's Story to learn about the history.

Update on Continental Congress 2009

2010-02-02T09:45:00.002-05:00

You've been waiting for someone to step up and do something. Well, someone has. The Continental Congress meet in November 2009. It is in your best interest to read the Articles and then sign the Pledge. When they get some millions (12 - 15 million) they will deliver the Articles to the White House and Congress. Get a copy of the Constitution here.

Peace on Earth - the Divine Reality of the Christmas Story.

2009-12-24T09:53:00.000-05:00

Who do you think Jesus really was? A humanitarian? A philanthropist? A social activist? A jazzed up carpenter? (Thanks to Allistiar Begg for putting it that way.)

Christmas cards are abound with the phrase Peace on Earth. What do you think that means?

Luke 2:13 says:

"Suddenly a great company of the heavenly host appeared with the angel, praising God and saying, 14"Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace to men on whom his favor rests."

Now, I am no bible scholar, that is for sure, but I am saved, born-again into Christ. I was not always that way. It took a very long time for me to come to that place, so it is out of experience that I feel qualified to make this explanation about what Peace means.

We are all sinners...all...you've heard me say that before on this blog. Not a one of us isn't a sinner. The 10 Commandments, I'm sure you have read them. Have you not ever broken one of those? If you are like other people you will immediately say, "Well, I've never killed anyone." You have, you know, when you think murderous thoughts about someone; your wife or husband, your mother-in-law, your boss, that snooty department secretary, the guy who cut you off on your commute to work, or, lately, those right-wingers like me who don't want anything to do with ObamaCare.

A few years ago my own mother told me she never told a lie in her life. "You just lied right there, Mom," I told her. There are no perfect people. Not even me...heh. But I've got something she doesn't. Forgiveness.

How does this tie in with Peace on Earth, you ask. God came to earth in the form of man, peace was born in that child. He was perfect in every way, and he went through all of our trials and struggles while he was here. By his own choice, he suffered being beaten beyond recognition and then nailed on a cross. At that moment he took on all the sins of the world, yours and mine, just so that we could be reconciled to God. All God has ever wanted is to have a relationship with us.

The good news is this: when you accept it and ask Jesus to come into your life you can experience Peace, the peace of Jesus, told by those angels, is brought into your heart. When you are in right relationship with God, you then live in the Kingdom of God, which is here now for those who believe.

You need to hear the story of Christ, whoever you are. Don't balk at it. There is only one way to get to the Peace on Earth that the peaceniks talk about. Accept Jesus, tell the Good News to Jews and Gentiles alike, and when the whole world knows then Jesus will return and begin the next phase with a new earth and a new heaven.

Don't take my word for it. Ask Him yourself. He will answer you. If you need some help with that, let me know.

Merry Christmas, friends. I pray God's blessing upon you.

Welcome Blogtalk Radio Horses Naturally Listeners

2009-12-20T18:25:00.001-05:00

Thank you for visiting my blog. See that horse? She's Merry Grace, my QH Mustang friend. I will never put a microchip in her neck. Never.

Here are some links I might have mentioned.

(Links open in a new window)

KY Journal of Equine, Agriculture & Natural Resources Law

The Kentuck Horse Council

Recent articles via a Google Search for Horses NAIS

To understand the history of NAIS, my novel First They Came for the Cows: An Activist's Story will be most helpful.

And, of course, become a follower of my blog to get the latest information about NAIS. Also, read though previous entries, starting at the beginning when I first learned of it.

Thanks for listening!

Merry Christmas. Keep Jesus close in 2010.

Baby Jesus, poster child for census?

2009-12-17T15:07:00.000-05:00

Someone wrote to me this morning wanting to know if I'd seen the new poster by the Census Bureau with Jesus on it. Nope, I hadn't but just a few clicks later I found this article from the Washington Post. I'm not a fan of the Census in the form that it is taking now. Remember, dear readers, that you are only obliged by law to answer the most basic questions.

Funny, isn't it, how they yammer about the Separation of Church and State when it suits their cause.

Under God: Baby Jesus, poster child for census?

In those days a decree went out from the U.S. Census Bureau that all Americans should be accounted for, but some were fearful or conflicted about such an accounting, and so Jesus, Mary and Joseph were called upon to provide comfort and encouragement -- on a poster.

Effective or offensive?
The poster was based on a story in Luke's gospel that says Joseph and pregnant Mary journeyed from Galilee to Bethlehem to take part in a census decreed by Roman Emperor Augustus. There is no other record of that particular census ever taking place, but the story explains why Jesus was born in a manger in Bethlehem, the city of David.
The poster was created by the National Association of Latino Elected Officials (not by the Census Bureau), which sent it to more than 7,000 churches to inform Hispanics about the census and encourage them to participate, regardless of their legal status. Some find it comforting.
The posters "are being well received by the congregations that we're working with, and they're reminding people of the Gospel story of how Jesus was born," Arturo Vargas, executive director of NALEO's educational fund, told Post reporters Carol Morello and Ed O'Keefe.
Others find it "blasphemous."
"The Bible establishes clearly that we are not supposed to use the name or God or Jesus in vain for any other purposes than worshiping," said Rev. Miguel Rivera, chairman of the National Coalition of Latino Clergy and Christian Leaders.
Rivera's group is encouraging Latinos to boycott the 2010 Census in order to pressure on Congress to reform immigration laws.
Fear of immigration, or immigration reform, seems to be a much larger issue than fear of the census. Rivera's group might want to consider making their own poster, using another gospel birth narrative.
A story in Matthew's gospel says that after Jesus was born, an angel of the Lord told Joseph to take Mary and Jesus and flee to Egypt, because King Herod was out to kill Jesus. According to the story, the family lived in Egypt for several years until Herod died.
"Joseph, Mary and Jesus were undocumented immigrants," the poster might say. "Don't be afraid."

Cradle to Grave

2009-12-15T12:44:00.005-05:00

I was listening to a bible study this morning and the pastor explained, "Jesus was born into a borrowed cradle, the manger, and was buried, after he was crucified on the cross, in a borrowed tomb." It really hit me but I wasn't sure of the significance.

Now I get it, a few hours later. Cradle to Grave. The Lord wants to take care of us, you and me, from cradle to grave. So does the government, but, snort, who is more prepared to do that and do that right? For me, that is easy...the Lord, owner of the universe, the one who knew you before the foundation of the world. Has he written your name in the Book of Life? I know mine is there. He has told me, personally, "I've got you in the palm of my hand" and I believe it.

Here we are at Christmas, at a very ugly point of time in the history of the country, indeed, in the world. The significance of Christmas has been lost through the ages. Understand this: God became Man in order to fufill the Law, more than the 10 commandments as the Jews had some 500 laws. He came as Jesus so that we, sons of Man, could be reconciled to him, returned to him, so that he could be our God and we, his people.

I hope you will take these things into your hearts and ponder them. In these coming times, the safest place to be will be under the protection of the Lord, Jesus the Christ, the savior.

Food marketing gone awry

2009-12-14T14:23:00.002-05:00

If you can't see the text in the bragging sign, it says something on the order of "You can buy all this for $89.75 here at Hannaford or pay $98.21 for the same items at PriceChopper."

The only reason the food covers the bottom of the basket is the way they have it laid out. I reckon about 1/4 of the basket is 'filled'.

The items in the basket are crap food...Little Debbies, house brand cheap frozen fries, 'lite' cranberry juice, etc.

I've noticed that the groceries I buy have gone up to $25.00 a bag in the last few months, and that is all paper goods, canned organic dog food, cleaning and laundry supplies, and a few produce items like celery, carrots, cilantro or cucumbers. We don't have to buy meat, eggs, or dairy at the grocery store.

Anway, I'll end this rant with this: People, we are being hosed!

--- NAIS is Contagious----

2009-12-07T16:28:00.002-05:00

--- NAIS is Contagious----

Interestingly enough, it's Pearl Harbor Day---and so it is for Cattle

12/7/09
©Doreen Hannes

Last week I heard from someone who works at several sale barns in the area that one was currently tagging all breeding cows with 840 NAIS tags if they did not have the metal brucellosis tag in their ears. As of January 1st, 2010, they would tag all breeding stock going through the chute with 840 tags regardless of metal bruce tags that were already in the cow's ear. The word was that this was 'some sale barns' and 'some veterinarians'.

I've spent several days trying to get information and documentation on this, and this morning, our Missouri State veterinarian, Dr. Taylor Woods, was kind enough to call me and explain what is happening in fair detail.

According to Dr. Woods, in March or April of 2009, he received a notice from the USDA stating that in two weeks all federal funding for Brucellosis was to be cut off. This was rather a shock to him and he called and went all the way up to Dr. John Clifford. Clifford told him he should have received a notice regarding this in December of 2008. Dr. Woods told him that this was the first he had heard of it, and went on to ascertain that the reason for failure of notification was because Missouri has been 5 years brucellosis free. Dr. Clifford stated that he would allow funding to continue for Missouri until December 31st, 2009. At that time, all blood testing for brucellosis would cease and all breeding cattle would be identified at the market by the market veterinarian with the 840 tag. The 840 tags are currently provided by the USDA free to the state of Missouri, and will supplant testing and the metal Brucellosis tags at market.

Also, Doctor Woods said that as far as he is aware, this is what is going to happen in every single state. Also, that only Texas and Missouri have been collecting blood and actually testing for Brucellosis. He said that these 840 tags are NOT NAIS tags. Also, notably, that he is rather irritated to see a successful program of Brucellosis eradication going away and relying instead upon a tag that will not detect the disease. It is confirmed via a myriad of sources that there will be no more pulling of blood to check for brucellosis in several states. The USDA Veterinary Services (VS) is doing away with the brucellosis program to bring in the OIE (World Animal Health Organization) standards for trade on Animal Identification, which at the very least, according to the Guidelines of the OIE, will identify an animal back to the farm of origin or 'premise'. These are the first two prongs of NAIS: premises registration, and animal identification. You cannot have 840 identification without going back to the 'premises'. Doctor Woods told me that they would be using the sale barns (markets) as the premises. This is NOT supported by any documentation that is available anywhere.

Now, I am completely unable to find any other designation for the 840 tags other than one which links the identified animal back to the NAIS premises of the owner selling the cattle. For cattle, all 840 tags are radio frequency identification, the USDA is allowing 840 non RFID identification for hogs, otherwise all 840 is RFID and all 840 is linked back to the farm of origin or premises.

Again, this is to go into effect in all states beginning on January the 1st, 2010. Doctor Woods was kind enough to assure me that he would be happy to give me whatever correspondence and documentation he could find regarding this. The issue as I see it is that there is not much time at all before January 1st, and I certainly cannot wait the six weeks it took for my last request from the Missouri Department of Agriculture to be fulfilled. The USDA never gives out any information unless you possess the capacity to actually sue them for the information…at least not to the likes of me.

There are several States with statute constraining the implementation of NAIS and premises registration. Missouri is one of those States, and there appears to be a definite conflict here unless the documents can indeed support something other than premises registration under NAIS standards (you can call it what you like, NFAIP, USAIP, NAIS, NLIS, or whatever), this would indeed be construed as mandating or otherwise forcing participation in NAIS or any similar program by the State Veterinarians office and a case of the USDA forcing a State Department to violate statute to continue to participate in interstate commerce. The USDA is in violation of the APA at the very least.

At any rate, I wanted to get this information out despite the lack of paperwork to support this as there are many sources confirming the generalities of this and no one saying that 840 tags will not be used on cattle going through the chutes in the state of Missouri after January 1st, 2010.

When I do get the actual documentation, I will be sending it on to all interested parties. This is trickle down and up NAIS in full effect. 2010 is the year for OIE compliance on animal identification for the USDA. And first they came for the cows……

Hungry? Tough! There's transfats in that.

2009-12-02T20:31:00.002-05:00

From Beyond the Broken Spectrum

Bloomberg partly to blame for city’s starvation

New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg is just another reason why people there are starving. According to a local soup kitchen, they have to constantly throw out donations of perfectly good food due to the city’s law banishing trans fat that took effect in July 2008. The law bans everyone with health department food licenses, including emergency food providers, from serving any foods with trans fat in them.

Government running wild anyone?

Another way to prevent the people from eating is Senator Dianne Feinstein's new bill.

The bill would amend the Poultry Products Inspection Act, the Federal Meat Inspection Act and the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act to prohibit the sale of any processed poultry, meat and FDA-regulated food that has not either undergone a pathogen reduction treatment, or been certified to contain no verifiable traces of pathogens.

The bill would also require labels on ground beef, or any other ground meat product, specifically naming every cut of meat that is contained in the product.

Finally, the bill would do away with what she called loopholes in current laws that allow for producers to add coloring, synthetic flavorings and spices to their products without informing the consumer.

"By enacting these simple changes, the Processed Food Safety Act will drastically reduce the presence of pathogens in our food and improve the ability of the consumer to make informed choices about the products they wish to eat," Feinstein said in a news release.

Here is some wording from the bill. You can read the bill in full here.

(A) each ingredient in the poultry or poultry product that was added, modified, or otherwise handled by the person has undergone a pathogen reduction treatment in accordance with requirements of the Secretary that will reduce the presence of pathogens of public health concern and other harmful food borne contaminants; or

`(B) the person has tested and certified that each ingredient in the poultry or poultry product that was added, modified, or otherwise handled by the person contains no verifiable traces of pathogens.'.

The thing is...do you believe they can completely eliminate pathogens? And why would they want to anyway? Understand that 'pathogen reduction treatment' can mean irradiation or washing fat (which will later be added to ground beef from animals imported from all over the world to add bulk and texture to those $1.00 hamburgers) with ammonia. See Food Inc Part 4 on Marler Blog.

If they really wanted to solve the problem they could do it by cleaning up the way feedlots are run for starters. And, outlaw GMOs. But they won't do either, or in fact any real solutions, because it would mean a loss of profits for the big boys.

I'm just glad, no - estatic - that I do not have to buy meat from the grocery store and I pray that I never have to, ever again.

Blog post because I feel like I should

2009-11-16T18:31:00.002-05:00

Dear Readers,

I've got 18 followers now. How nice! Welcome and thanks for your interest.

NAIS seems to be quiet right now, though it isn't dead by any means. We're seeing a scattering of articles like this one NAIS: Simpler Technology Fuels Fire, by William Pape on Nov 14, 2009. Pure propaganda by the executive vice president of AgInfoLink which is in partnership with USDA to provide NAIS compliant services.

Worth watching right now is S. 510, the Food Safety Modernization Act. The Senate HELP committee is due to work on the bill, doing the mark-up, on Wednesday. Here are a few articles about it:
Drew Joseph: Small farms fear food safety bill will further industrialize food
and
Coalition to Senate: Move on Food Safety Be sure to read the comment at the bottom of this article. It says it all, just what we need to be paying attention to.

And another...which should raise the hackles of any farmer or homesteader who likes to take grants. Growing Safe Food Act of 2009 S. 2758. The wording is right out of WHO and OIE's Guide to Good Farming Practices.

It just seems that every day something more urgently disastrous comes out of Washington. Now, and this just in:

President Obama, White House Climate Czar Carol Browner, and their Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are not waiting for Congress to pass cap-and-trade.

The enormous grassroots reaction to the outrageous Waxman-Markey energy tax bill passing the U.S. House has slowed Senate progress to a crawl. While cap-and-trade remains a major threat (especially with new "tri-partisan" negotiations betweens Senators Graham, Kerry, and Lieberman), the biggest threat of huge new energy taxes and government controls right now comes not from legislation, but regulation.

Based on a legal theory originally conceived by Climate Czar Carol Browner in the late 1990s, Obama's EPA is moving ahead with greenhouse gases regulations under the 1970 Clean Air Act even though in 1970 global warming hadn't even been invented yet, and the doom-saying scientists were instead warning of an impending ice age!

Click here to help stop EPA's power grab!

Do you feel it, too? It's coming down around our ears. It's like an avalanche.

Obama Poised to Cede US Sovereignty

2009-10-17T08:52:00.003-04:00

On October 14, Lord Christopher Monckton, a noted climate change skeptic, gave a presentation at Bethel University in St. Paul, MN. In this 4 minute excerpt from his speech, he issues a dire warning to all Americans regarding the United Nations Climate Change Treaty, scheduled to be signed in Copenhagen in December 2009.

If this does not alarm you then you need to assess your heart. Are you an American or are you a Globalist?

Welcome Vermont Tea Party Bloggers

2009-09-24T21:26:00.002-04:00

We'll be posting a blog roll over the next few weeks of the new Vermont Tea Party bloggers. It is important, in this very liberal state filled with people who just believe what they are told by MSM, that we offer an outlet for the real truth.

The truth will set you free.

Welcome Coast-to-Coast radio listeners!

2009-09-20T10:16:00.004-04:00

Good gracious! I was on Coast-to-Coast radio last night with Ian Punnett. That's why I'm tired this morning. Coast-to-Coast is out of Seattle and the time difference put me on at 1:30 am EST.

But it was worth it! Since that time there have been close to 900 hits to this blog. [As of tonight, 9-24, Coast-to-Coast has driven 2100 hits to this blog. - Hen]

I hope you will become followers and learn about what the plans are to harmonize agriculture, severely limiting your ability to eat wholesome food.

God Bless!

Just a ham sandwich away from the total collapse of agriculture

2009-09-14T09:09:00.004-04:00

As one commenter put it:

I am so confused. How is tracking the legal animals going to stop his scenario of the ham sandwich? Are we going to catch and tag the feral pigs too? Will those pigs be mingling with the legal pigs at a rave or a mixer? How, exactly, will knowing who owns what animals help track where the feral pigs go? I don't own farm animals at this time but this simply doesn't make any sense. Tracing cows back to the source for mad cow disease, I can understand. Tracking an infected, wayward ham sandwich? Really?

9/14/2009 8:28:47 AM

September 14, 2009

Livestock tracking program upsets some in Southwest Florida

By AMY BENNETT WILLIAMS
awilliams@news-press.com

Michelle Musco doesn't mind telling the feds about her goats - all six of them: Nubians, pygmies and Boers that her two sons care for as members of the 4-H Goats-R-Us club.

Musco, who lives in Buckingham, is one of hundreds of Lee County residents who have voluntarily signed up for a government program to identify and track farm animals in the U.S.

"It was very easy - very user-friendly," Musco said about the sign-up process.

The federal government embarked on the massive effort to locate every livestock animal in the country - from cattle to backyard geese to 4-H hogs - in 2002.

The first part of the National Animal Identification System, now under way, is registering every place such animals live or stay temporarily, such as auction houses.

Although it's voluntary and free, the program may become mandatory in the future, said Stephen Monroe, the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Florida's NAIS coordinator.

The second part would be identifying animals - whether with an ear tag, a microchip leg band or other label - and placing them into a federal database. That hasn't happened yet, and may not, depending on funding and the public's reaction, said Vermont farmer Walter Jeffries, who heads up NONAIS, a group that opposes the program."They've gone back and forth on if it will be mandatory, voluntary or abandoned," Jeffries wrote in an e-mail. "Congress cut their funding for NAIS to the bone (and) at this point things are quiet. We'll see what happens."

Although Jeffries and others in some parts of the country are up in arms about the program, in Lee County, no one has kicked up too much of a fuss.

"We've had some angry folks in some places," said Monroe, "people who've accused us of being Big Brother or working for the tax man, but it's not true."

At a listening session in

Austin, Texas, one of 14 held throughout the country, some attendees - mostly farmers - accused the government of lying, conspiring with corporations and wasting money (transcripts are at animalid.aphis.usda.gov).

So far, 220 livestock owners in Lee County have registered, Monroe said. Statewide, the total's about 7,800 - about 30 percent, he estimates.

One of those who hasn't heard of it or signed up is John Domanski of Buckingham, who raises a few dozen chickens, ducks and geese.

"I just don't do that much business," Domanski said, "and most of what I sell goes from here to the cook pot. It seems like it would be a big paperwork burden and the time you'd have to spend would make it prohibitive."

The program is designed to "protect the health of U.S. livestock and poultry and the economic well-being of those industries ... to quickly and effectively trace an animal disease to its source," according to its Web site.

Florida's borders are very porous, with animals and people coming in and out by the millions, Monroe said - some potentially infected with deadly illness.

"We're one sandwich away from a disaster like foot-and-mouth (a contagious disease of hoofed animals)," Monroe said. "Say someone comes from Europe with an infected ham sandwich, but when they take it out in Lee County, it smells funny so they toss it out the window. Feral pigs come along, eat it and then they spread the disease to horses, cows, goats and all of a sudden, we're behind the 8-ball." (A sandwich away???? OMG! - HEN)

"The only chance of containing the disease is knowing where the animals are. It's all about traceability," Monroe said.

Agricultural Misdiagnosis

2009-08-17T07:35:00.006-04:00

Food Safety Bills- Misdiagnosis Strikes Again

© Doreen Hannes 2009

Houston, We DO Have a Problem……

Is there a problem in our food supply? Most people would hazard to guess that yes, there are more issues now than in the past several decades. And they would be correct. So how has this happened?

That's where it gets a bit more tricky. What has changed in the past twenty years in the food chain? Aside from the tremendous increase in imports, the FDA and the USDA have begun to implement HACCP (Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point plans) instead of literal inspections on processing plants. HACCP is an international standard that goes along with 'risk-analysis', and 'risk management' and international standards applied through the "Sanitary Phyto-Sanitary Agreement" of the World Trade Organization. It is supposed to increase food safety by having people who operate these plants design and plan protocols to follow that are then submitted to certifiers for approval and judged to be sufficient or insufficient by the certifier. Then inspections are conducted, but not nearly as frequently nor with as much rigor as they once were, but with lots of paperwork added to non-productive overhead and less in the way of actual physical inspections.

Now the march is on to bring HACCP to the farm itself. But the question is, do these problems originate on the farm? Not usually. The problems with e-coli in meat stem from sloppy slaughtering at slaughter plants where they are reportedly running cattle through so fast that they sometimes still moo as they are being skinned. When intestinal material gets on the meat, this can cause the meat to be contaminated with e-coli that occurs naturally in the intestines. The answer to this problem is to slow the line down and do a better job of being careful in the butchering process. Not to audit farms for the prevalence of e-coli in the intestinal tracts of cattle, or any other animal.

The issue becomes one of industrialized agribusiness in direct opposition to agriculturalists. People who raise animals and eat the meat at their own dinner table are not in the least interested in eating antibiotic residues or steroid filled meat themselves. Those who run giant feed lots to bring animals up to slaughter weight as quickly as possible have more of an interest in using the steroids and needing the antibiotics to keep the animals alive, yet they don't all implant steroids or feed antibiotics either. Even the largest feedlots are subservient to the dwindling number of meat packing plants. Five plants control over 80% of slaughter now.

It's the same with the vegetables and other produce. The processing is where contamination becomes the issue. There is no way to raise crops in a vacuum without contact with any wildlife or birds that may off load their alimentary canals as they do flyovers catching bugs and the like. Trying to run a completely 'pest free area', as international standards instruct, is antithetical to reality. If you want serious food scarcity, try to keep life from playing its part in the production of food. Washing the produce before eating it is simply the responsibility of whoever is preparing the food. Not something to be micromanaged by bureaucrats swarming over farms with check lists 20 plus pages long and a penchant for sterility that rivals Howard Hughes.

The food safety bills that have been put forward in the US Congress all have three things in common that will not address the problems of real food safety in the least. Instead they create new revenue avenues for more bureaucrats and add several layers of paperwork onto those who would like to continue to fight the weather, wildlife, multinational corporate consolidation and government regulators to continue to feed the nation and themselves.

The three top issues that appear in all these so-called "food safety" bills are as follows:

1) ascribe international standards to fulfill obligations to international agreements

2) make food grown domestically captive supply for export

3) bring certification and auditing to production and all processing

Understanding that 'international standards' are a mix of guidelines from Codex Alimentarius, The World Animal Health Organization (OIE), and the IPPC (International Plant Protection Convention) that, when piled together, become "Good Agricultural Practices" and require full traceability back to the farm of origin along with all processes being certified, verified, audited and documented along the way on every article of food world wide should give one pause to consider the level of scrutiny and enormous bureaucracy that would be involved in such a system.

The fastest growing segment of agriculture in the United States is the local food movement. These international standards will bury those on the production side of this movement in paperwork that would choke an IRS agent, and people simply will not continue to sweat and toil in their pastures and fields only to sweat over paperwork with fines, penalties and inspection fees as the likely reward for their efforts.

The answer to the honest concerns about food safety is to have the Congress instruct agencies in charge of inspection to ignore HACCP and actually inspect the processing plants that they already have the authority to inspect and leave those who wish to court export markets with the right to do so by following the protocols outlined in the Export Verification Services of the USDA. Passing legislation that will drastically increase regulatory authority of the FDA and USDA is not going to address the problem that exists, but it sure would increase their revenue stream and further the economic collapse of rural America. +++++

( A few links: For the fun of implementing HACCP on a farm, check out this link:
http://www.ourfood.com/HACCP_ISO_9000.html#SECTION001600400000000000000 and keep scrolling, please.

Then: http://www.oie.int/eng/normes/mcode/en_sommaire.htm look at the sections on animal traceability and identification

Also: http://www.codexalimentarius.net/web/standard_list.jsp and look at a few of those on traceability and good hygienic practices

Live cattle slaughtered-this is just one of several articles on this:
http://www.ericsecho.org/investigation.htm )

In Depth on HR2749: "Welcome to the Global Plantation" http://www.newswithviews.com/Hannes/doreen100.htm

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h2749/show

An unususal visitor

2009-08-12T19:40:00.003-04:00

Ms. Jadranka ZENIC-ZELJKOVIC
Head of WTO Unit
Ministry of Economy and Regional
Development was interested enough in Doreen Hannes' article Welcome to the Global Plantation that she downloaded it to her hard-drive.

Over the years there have been some interesting visitors like the USDA, FDA, and UN but this is the first time that the WTO has dropped by.

WAVES! Hi Ya'll.

Seminar on Int'l Agencies on YOUR plate!

2009-08-10T19:12:00.001-04:00

This week Truth Farmer, with your host, Doreen Hannes, will be an educational extravaganza. The plan (Good Lord Willing and the Connection works) is to give what will amount to a seminar on how the World Trade Organization, Food and Ag Organization of the UN, Codex Alimentarius, the OIE (World Animal Health Organization), the IPPC of the UN (International Plant Protection Convention, and the ISO all work through the executive branch of the government on implementing what amounts to a take over of the food supply and how HR 2749 is the current vehicle for that orchestrated take over.

This is a very complicated and detailed subject and you should get a pen and paper handy to take notes. This and the Clean Water Restoration Act will work together to destroy property rights and combined with Cap and Trade, the effects are going to be horrific. Please listen to the show, and there will be segments where callers will be welcome for specific questions about this subject. It will be constrained to the Food Safety bill and the methods of the WTO. This is too important to remain ignorant. Please be informed!

Click on the links below to hear Truth farmer on Tuesday from 12pm CST to 2pm CST:

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/Sentinel_Radio/2009/08/11/Truth-Farmer-with-Doreen

http://www.tsrn.us/blog/show-schedule/

Feel Free to call in after the first half hour, the number is (646) 727-2652.

Doreen Hannes

Listen to "Truth Farmer" on Sentinel Radio at:

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/Sentinel_Radio/2009/08/11/Truth-Farmer-with-Doreen

Also check out www.newswithviews.com for my articles on the National Animal Identification system and from other excellent researchers on many topics affecting your freedom...also my blog, www.truth-farmer.blogspot.com

Welcome to the Global Plantation

2009-08-06T20:30:00.002-04:00

- HR 2749 Authorizes International Take Over of Food Production -

The staff of Congress said HR 2749, the Food Safety Enhancement Act of 2009, didn't authorize the National Animal Identification System. Many organic groups agreed with them. However, they weren't telling the truth. At least not the whole truth. It certainly doesn't mention "the" National Animal Identification System by name, but it definitely authorizes the program. It also doesn't state that it is legally authorizing Good Agricultural Practices, or GAP, partially comprised of Codex guidelines on traceability and food safety and the OIE's Guide to Good Farming Practices including auditing, certification and inspections as well as disincentives for not participating in the form of fines, penalties, and loss of access to market; but it most certainly does. Is it possible that Congress doesn't have the slightest idea what they were voting on? Possibly. It doesn't come as any surprise that Congress didn't read the bill as it was changed three times in a 24-hour period before it was passed out of the House with a 283-142 vote. Never mind that they don't read the bills any way.

Are these wild and unsubstantiated assertions about HR 2749? I wish they were. It's actually fairly easy to prove that this bill does all that I stated above and even more. All one needs to do is understand what is involved in Good Agricultural Practices and how the agencies of the World Trade Organization operate within member countries to get this. Don't worry, I will explain that to you in very brief detail, and there are only a few pieces from the legislation itself that are necessary to read to fully comprehend that this is indeed what we are dealing with in HR 2749. The international guidelines are much lengthier than the legislation itself.

HR 2749 is 160 pages in its final version. If you search through it, you will find the following references to international standards and guidelines.

"(B) INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS.—In issuing guidance or regulations… the Secretary shall review international hazard analysis and preventive control standards that are in existence on the date of the enactment of this Act and relevant to such guidelines or regulations to ensure that the programs…..are consistent……with such standards." (page 35)

"CONSISTENCY WITH INTERNATIONAL OBLIGATIONS.—The Secretary shall apply this paragraph consistently with United States obligations under international agreements." (page81)

"The Secretary shall issue regulations to ensure that any qualified certifying entity and its auditors are free from conflicts of interest. In issuing these regulations, the Secretary may rely on or incorporate international certification standards." (page 82)

What this actually means is that there will be a layer of auditors, certifiers and inspectors over every aspect of food production in this country and that these inspectors and certifiers will be trained in ISO (International Standards Organization) management program certification. The ISO has been working with Codex Alimentarius on Food Safety Standards and in particular, a technical standard for Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI) which is a consortium of the seven largest food retailers in the world, and that is ISO22000:2005. All traceability falls under the purview of Codex, the OIE (World Animal Health Organization and the IPPC (International Plant Protection Convention) for global trade agreements.

The following excerpt from 2749 shows the fully interoperable global network already in existence regarding food and its production:

"Development of such guidelines shall take into account the utilization of existing unique identification schemes and compatibility with customs automated systems, such as integration with the Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) and the International Trade Data System (ITDS), and any successor systems." (page 142)

So it is clear that international standards and guidelines are implicit in this legislation. Note the usage of the command form SHALL. This isn't a 'might', 'may' or in anyway a voluntary issue on the part of the Secretary. Then there is the section on Traceability. This is a code word in the National Animal Identification System and when one reads Sec.107 of this bill, it definitively describes components of NAIS even down to 48 hour trace back. which cannot even be fantasized about with out individual animal identification.

"…..the Secretary shall issue regulations establishing a tracing system that enables the Secretary to identify each person who grows, produces, manufactures, processes, packs, transports, holds, or sells such food in as short a timeframe as practicable but no longer than 2 business days." (=note that it says "grows"=) (page 70)

and…

"……use a unique identifier for each facility owned or operated by such person for such purpose…" (page69)

So we have PIN and 48 hour traceback harmonizing with international standards and guidelines along with this:

"….‘‘(C) COORDINATION REGARDING FARM IMPACT.—In issuing regulations under this paragraph that will impact farms, the Secretary ‘‘(i) shall coordinate with the Secretary of Agriculture; and ‘‘(ii) take into account the nature of the impact of the regulations on farms." (page 71)

Now that I've killed you with legalese, it's time to let you find out just what these international standards and guidelines mean to those engaged in agriculture in this country.

Good Agricultural Practices are not a standard in and of themselves. They are more of a combination of standards and guidelines set forth by the FAO, Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN, through both the OIE (World Animal Health Organization) and Codex Alimentarius (Food Code) to meet the certification and auditing side of the international trade aspects of the standards set forth. The OIE and Codex are charged with setting global standards and guidelines for the member countries of the WTO to meet to satisfy the SPS (Sanitary and Phyto-Sanitary), TBT (Technical Barriers to Trade) and Equivalency agreements of the WTO for participation in international trade. Both the OIE and CODEX have guidelines for traceability that, with the passage of HR2749 into law, would be written into regulations governing all interstate commerce within the boundaries of the United States. The components of traceability are the pillars of NAIS that many of us have become so familiar with in the course of the battle over the past several years. Those being 1)Premise Identification, 2) Animal Identification and 3) Animal Tracking. You can't have traceability under international standards without having those three components.

One of the main issues in the implementation of these standards and guidelines within a member nation of the WTO is that they must have a legal framework through which to regulate and enforce these guidelines and standards. HR 2749 would meet the criteria for that legal framework via the excerpts from the bill above.

In the OIE's "Guide to Good Farming Practices" the management of a livestock facility are clearly spelled out. Some of these recommendations that would become defacto law in the US under agency rule-making on passage of HR2749 (GGFP delineates international guidelines for food safety at the farm level) are:

- For each animal…Require and keep all commercial and health documents enabling their exact itinerary to be traced from their farm or establishment to their final destination…

-Keep a record of all persons entering the farm…..

-Keep medical certificates of persons working with the animals……

-Keep documents proving the water you give to the animals meet specific criteria

-Keep samples of all feed given to the animals

-Keep all documents from official inspections

-Keep records of treatment and procedures on all animals (castration, disbudding, calving, medications, etc.)

-Prevent domestic animals (cats and dogs) from roaming in and around livestock buildings

-Place all these documents at the disposal of the competent authority (Veterinary Services) when it conducts farm visits.

Some of the other guidelines and standards that would come into play after the implementation of traceability for all agricultural products would be : (from FAO COAG/17 "Development of a Framework for Good Agricultural Practices") "the adoption and implementation of international standards and codes for which Codex food safety standards and guidelines have been designed, and the associated capacity building, training, development and field implementation in the context of the different production systems and agro-ecozones. These include: Enhancing Food Quality and Safety by Strengthening Handling, Processing and Marketing in the Food Chain (214A9); Capacity Building and Risk Analysis Methodologies for Compliance with Food Safety Standards and Pesticide Control (215P1); Food Quality Control and Consumer Protection (221P5); Food Safety Assessment and Rapid Alert System (221P6); and Food Quality and Safety Throughout the Food Chain (221P8)."*

To be certified as meeting the requirements of "GAP", which is synonymous with being in compliance with international standards and guidelines, we can check out GlobalGAP.org. This is "the" certifying methodology for international trade in ag products. Here are a few excerpts from their 122 page general regulations booklet has links to checklists for those who would be certifiers and auditors under the principles of GAP. This is an organization, not a governing body under WTO agreements, but working with nations and businesses to meet the criteria regarding these GAP practices for international trade. Here is a bare minimum of excerpts from their regulation document:

-(ii) Developing a Good Agricultural Practice (G.A.P.) framework for benchmarking existing assurance schemes and standards including traceability. (iii) Providing guidance for continuous improvement and the development and understanding of best practice. (iv) Establish a single, recognised framework for independent verification.

-Production Location: A production unit or group of production units, covered by the same ownership, operational procedures, farm management, and GLOBALGAP (EUREPGAP) decision-making activities.

-Within the context of GLOBALGAP (EUREPGAP) Integrated Farm Assurance this means tracing product from the producer’s immediate customer back to the producer and certified farm.

-Within the context of GLOBALGAP (EUREPGAP) Integrated Farm Assurance this means tracking product from the producer to his immediate customer.

In simple English, which appears to be highly lacking in all these guidelines, it means NAIS for everything, and for anyone who wishes to be engaged in agriculture….Remember the "grows" phrase from the earlier excerpt from HR2749. Now let's look at some of the 'exception' clauses in HR2749. This bill is a terrifically crafty piece of legislation that is designed to cloud the reader's understanding of the impact of the law being proposed in it. All of the exception clauses give the exception under this Act so long as you are ready to be regulated under a different Act. We'll just look at a couple of these clauses to allow you to get the gist of the lack of exception available through the exceptions….

Farms- A farm is exempt from the requirements of this Act to the extent such farm raises animals from which food is derived that is regulated under the Federal Meat Inspection Act, the Poultry Products Inspection Act, or the Egg Products Inspection Act.

‘‘(I) such an operation that packs or holds food, provided that all food used in such activities is grown, raised, or consumed on such farm or another farm under the same ownership;

‘‘(II) such an operation that manufactures or processes food, provided that all food used in such activities is consumed on such farm or another farm under the same ownership; (pages9 and10)

Thus, if you grow everything you feed and consume everything you grow, and use no minerals or salts that you don't mine yourself, you may be exempt. Or, in plain English, don't even try to make a living in agriculture if you won't comply with these rules.

One more exception to contend with here is:

‘(A) DIRECT SALES BY FARMS- Food is exempt from the requirements of this subsection if such food is--

‘(i) produced on a farm; and

‘(ii) sold by the owner, operator, or agent in charge of such farm directly to a consumer or to a restaurant or grocery store. (page 71)

This sounds good. However, there are several problems with this that are not evident without some knowledge of how things are done in the traditional avenues open for market to growers. First of all, cattle, whom you may recall as the primary target of the NAIS Business Plan, are sold either at auction barns or via potload to feedlots. It is illegal to sell beef directly from the farm to consumers in every state that I know of. People often will sell a calf ready to butcher in halves or quarters to people and deliver the calf to the slaughter facility for the consumer, but this is far from the normal route of commerce in cattle or other species of meat animals. Even if you can securely wedge your operation into this particular exemption, they get you later via the record keeping section of this bill:

‘(E) RECORDKEEPING REGARDING PREVIOUS SOURCES AND SUBSEQUENT RECIPIENTS- For a food or person covered by a limitation or exemption under subparagraph (B), (C), or (D), the Secretary shall require each person who produces, receives, manufactures, processes, packs, transports, distributes, or holds such food to maintain records to identify the immediate previous sources of such food and its ingredients and the immediate subsequent recipients of such food.

‘(F) RECORDKEEPING BY RESTAURANTS AND GROCERY STORES- For a food covered by an exemption under subparagraph (A), restaurants and grocery stores shall keep records documenting the farm that was the source of the food.

‘(G) RECORDKEEPING BY FARMS- For a food covered by an exemption under subparagraph (A), farms shall keep records, in electronic or non-electronic format, for at least 6 months documenting the restaurant or grocery store to which the food was sold.’. (page 74 and 75)

So being exempt means you are required to keep records. Keeping required records means you may be required to release those records. So how exempt can a person get under this legislation?

Then of course, as with any law, there are the fines and penalties. These are from $20,000 to $1,000,000 per violation. (page 122)

There is also the change under the seizure section that takes away judicial overview…(double quotations indicate amending language)

…….procedure in cases under this section shall conform, as nearly as may be, to the procedure in admiralty; except that on demand of either party any issue of fact joined in any such case shall be tried by jury, ""and except that, with respect to proceedings relating to food, Rule G of the Supplemental Rules of Admiralty or Maritime Claims and Asset Forfeiture Actions shall not apply in any such case, exigent circumstances shall be deemed to exist for all seizures brought under this section, and the summons and arrest warrant shall be issued by the clerk of the court without court review in any such case""……pg 116

So we can just throw out that pesky Fourth Amendment to the Constitution and while we're at it, let's get rid of probable cause as well via this wording from page 117:

by striking ‘‘credible evidence or information indicating’’ and inserting ‘‘reason to believe’’;

There are many other dangerous aspects to HR 2749, like seizures, quarantines, and licensing and whistle blower provisions, but this should leave no doubt that this bill will indeed affect farms and has the potential to affect even home food production if an agency decides to apply the international risk analysis schemes to that venue.

Now, the questions that everyone involved in agriculture, meaning everyone who eats, must ask themselves are these:

Can regulating, fining and destroying the freedom of people to grow food create food safety?

Have the impacts of Free Trade on this nation been beneficial for the citizens of this country?

Have food safety concerns increased or decreased since we have begun to import more food under these trade agreements?

And ultimately, does the US Constitution provide for the voidance of the Bill of Rights to participate in global trade?

My copy of the Constitution clearly does not allow for any law to void the Bill of Rights which is unalienable and Constitutionally guaranteed. It's time to let our Federal representatives know in no uncertain terms, that everything to do with governance ultimately comes down to the consent of the governed, and we will not consent to being run by international agencies.

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

My deep thanks to Paul Griepentrog, who helped in going through the legislation and many of the ramifications and amendments to current law under this Act.

Operation Go Flag Yourself!

2009-08-05T20:55:00.003-04:00

We take a break from NAIS and HR 2749 to report this: The Obamanation wants people to report any fishy information.... well, read it for yourselves. And then if you are in need of a good belly laugh read Michelle Malkin's post about it, but be sure to read the comments.

Snitch on me if you must. Just get the spelling of my last name correct.

I'll be back tomorrow with an intense breakdown of the way NAIS is embedded in HR 2749.

The White House is under fire for a blog post asking supporters to send "fishy" information received through rumors, chain e-mails and casual conversations to a White House e-mail address, flag@whitehouse.gov.
Conservatives have pounced on the request, accusing the White House of acting Orwellian.
"If you get an e-mail from your neighbor and it doesn't sound right, send it to the White House?"said Sen. John Barasso, R-Wyo. " People, I think all across America are going to say is this 1984? What is happening here? Is big brother watching?"
Radio host Rush Limbaugh accused the White House of using heavy-handed tactics.
"They're looking for tattletales,"he said. "They're looking for snitches. They're looking for informants."
Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, charged the White House with compiling an "enemies list."In a letter to the president, Cornyn urged Obama to provide Congress with more details on what the White House plans to do with anyone reported for "fishy"speech.
"I am not aware of any precedent for a president asking American citizens to report their fellow citizens to the White House for pure political speech that is deemed 'fishy' or otherwise inimical to the White House's political interests,"he wrote.
"You should not be surprised that these actions taken by your White House staff raise the specter of a data collection program. As Congress debates health care reform and other critical policy matters, citizen engagement must not be chilled by fear of government monitoring the exercise of free speech rights,"he wrote.
The controversy is part of a larger debate on health care reform that has led Democrats to portray town hall audiences protesting a Democratic-sponsored bill as angry mobs duped into hostile actions by special interest groups.
The Democratic National Committee released a Web video and e-mail on Wednesday blasting opponents of the 10-year, $1 trillion plan.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said lawmakers will continue to press for reform "in spite of the loud, shrill voices trying to interrupt town hall meetings."
Republicans say counter that lawmakers have a responsibility to listen to constituents and their concerns.

What is wrong with HR2749 after reading it

2009-08-03T19:39:00.003-04:00

The following is an excellent analysis of HR2749.

Written in response to a blog elsewhere that states the latest version isn't so bad...

I believe I have the last copy of HR2749 in my lap; it was “ordered to be printed” yesterday. I have a number of concerns still.
1. It gives the Federal government jurisdiction over interstate commerce, still, which violates the Constitution. There is no exemption for farmers, homesteaders or small processors who sell only in their own states.
2. The exemption for those who sell over 50% direct to the public will of course require some of us to PROVE the mix of our business, which means government inspection of our paperwork, farms, etc anyway. I own a small local food store. I am the sole owner and the sole employee and currently have nothing of my own in the store other than tomatoes and cucumbers, but will have goat meat within the month and eggs and bread as soon as my egg processing room and kitchen are licensed. Now you’d THINK since I am sole owner, this would be direct to the public, but since I have a storefront instead of a farm stand, it is not. Complying with HR2749 would make my tiny 9 acre farm cost me more money and heartache than it is worth. Those folks who sell at a farmers market and at a retail store or establishment will have to watch their sales very, very carefully and keep their records for years, just in case. I know someone who underreports farm market sales because the market takes a percentage and he thinks that is so unfair even though he signed a contract. This person will pay eventually, but to the Feds rather than to the market he’s cheating, because he also sells to a restaurant. There goes his more than 50% direct!

Read the rest here at Localvore Oregon

I

NAIS/Premises ID….FCLDF takes it to the courts

2009-07-25T07:40:00.006-04:00

The following comes from The Proud Political Junkies Gazette and used by permission from Marti Oakley.

I have a bit of a different opinion about the FCLDF because they fumbled the ball early on, made some very sophomoric mistakes, and among their cast of characters are known to be controlled opposition. Additionally, there are some questions about the ruling itself.
[I changed the colors for the text because the original blue could not be read on this green background. Hat Tip to Laura - Hen]

A decision by U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer, located in the Washington District of Criminals, throwing out a lawsuit brought by Farm to Consumer Legal Defense Fund (FCLDF) asking the court to halt the implementation of NAIS, was based on her assertion that there is no federal law and/or, no federal regulation ordering the implementation of the National Animal Identification System (NAIS). FCLDF brought the suit asking for temporary injunctive relief……a move that was good in its intentions but obviously filed too early. As no law or regulation exists to authorize NAIS/Premises ID and the claims by USDA and Tom Vilsack go unsubstantiated despite repeated requests to produce the authority they claim, injunctive relief could not be granted as no law has been passed …yet,….although multiple legislative assaults are in the works.

I guess this statement in her opinion would answer the question posed to Tom Vilsack and other officials from the USDA, demanding to know under what authority or law NAIS is being implemented and is scheduled to become mandatory. Turns out, according to Judge Collyer…there is none. It would also answer the question as to why Mr. Vilsack nor the USDA will respond to the question or even acknowledge it has ever been asked.

It is apparent from this ruling there is no legal, lawful, legislative regulation or statute which allows, establishes or mandates NAIS. The USDA, using its so-called “rule-making” authority, which is nothing less than illegal law enacted by a non-elected bureaucracy, has simply been the tool to by-pass constitutional rights and liberties in an effort to expand the power and control of not only the agency itself, but also the federal government which has long since exceeded its Constitutional authority and power on many levels.

Since the court has ruled in this way, does this not make the bribes paid to state officials to “voluntarily” implement NAIS , euphemistically called [cooperative agreements]..an act of collusion? Wouldn’t this also make refusal to comply with state enacted mandates, for which the Judge herself has admitted, there is no lawful basis, a legal protection for farmers and ranchers? And would this not also include the prohibition on the SWAT team-like assaults being perpetrated in states like Wisconsin which accepted one of the USDA’s multi-million dollar bribes to do a test run on NAIS/Premises ID?

The judge also seemed not to be concerned about the impending loss of private property rights which is an intended result of NAIS/Premises ID; apparently having no judicial problem with livestock owners being referred to as [stakeholders, legally implying they have an interest in but are not the owners of their own property] and land owners relegated to the category of [tenants or managers] again removing them from the rightful legal ownership of the land.

Judge Collyer’s expert legal opinion went on to say that NAIS is “an identification and tracking program developed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and adopted by state agriculture departments voluntarily”. This is a patently false statement by the court. USDA DID NOT develop the NAIS or Premises ID program. USDA is simply trying to codify into law Codex Alimentarius and all of its international regulations and standards of which NAIS/Premises Id is a key feature.

Again, paying bribes to state officials to implement what the Judge herself identifies as a non-existence law or regulation should have warranted the halting of any programs regardless of what non-elected agency had launched them into the public domain on behalf of Bio-tech and Codex Alimentarius.

“Collyer continued with….”They, however, completely fail to address Michigan state law, which authorizes the director of MDA to adopt programs such as NAIS compliance for cattle, and plaintiffs’ reliance on federal law is misplaced.” The Judge does not admit or allude to the fact that Michigan would not have enacted this law without federal interference or encouragement.

The Judge seemed not to consider that Michigan officials had illegally entered into an agreement with USDA, which was the catalyst for the Michigan law, and had accepted monetary assistance, cooperative funding or what is in my opinion, legalized bribery to do so.

The Judge seemed not to be aware of a precedence, (a judicial concept continually invoked by courts when their intended rulings are in conflict with actual law) or, as in this instance totally ignored by the court as it would have rendered the ruling void, which states:

“The general misconception is that any statute passed by legislators bearing the appearance of law constitutes the law of the land. The Constitution of the United States is the supreme law of the land, and any statue, to be valid, must be in agreement. It is impossible for both the Constitution and a law violating it to be valid; one must prevail. This is succinctly stated as follows: The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment, and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it. An unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed. Such a statute leaves the question that it purports to settle just as it would be had the statute not been enacted.”

“Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principals follow that it imposes no duties, confers no rights, creates no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection, and justifies no acts performed under it.. A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one.

An unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede any existing valid law. Indeed, insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the land, it is superseded thereby. No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it.”
Sixteenth American Jurisprudence, Second Edition, Section 177. (late 2nd Ed. Section 256)

It seems apparent that precedence is only advantageous when it does not conflict with intended encroachment by the government or its agencies.

Although the above opinion is by far not the only opinion of the Courts regarding the illegality of states agreeing to the implementation of what are obviously assaults on constitutional rights and protections, it is the most powerful.

Kudos to Farm to Consumer Legal Defense Fund for having the courage to mount this lawsuit.

July 24, 2009
Categories: National Animal Indentification System . Tags: Constitution, FCLDF, Judge Collyer, Michigan, NAIS, premises ID, USDA, Vilsack, Wisconsin . Author: martijo

I need names for my 'project'

2009-07-17T14:58:00.004-04:00

Fellow activists... I have had a project going for a little while now. In June we issued a special "Call to Arms" asking for donations. We got some, could use some more though, if you are kind enough to donate.
In the second step of this project I need a list of names of people who are against NAIS. A thousand names or more. More would be better but a thousand would also work. In order for us to use your name we need your permission. This is not for a petition, but for media exposure. That is all I can say about it right now, I hope you will understand.

So, for the willing, here is what I propose. Leave a comment here on my blog with your Name. That's all, your full name but no address, no other identifier. Your real name. I will be deleting stupid alias names like Donald Duck and the like, but please, don't waste my time doing that. By leaving a comment with your name it signifies your agreement to the use of your name in the media by me one time and one time only.

We need over a thousand names and we could also use more donations. If you have questions that I can answer, leave a comment here or email me at henwhisperer at gmail dot com.

Let's roll.

Jolley: Five Minutes (not) with USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack

2009-07-10T12:32:00.002-04:00

What a chicken. Chuck Jolley over on the Cattlenetwork wanted to interview Vilsack in wake of the listening sessions that were held recently. It is pretty pathetic that he couldn't respond personally and has his goon, Dr. Clifford, APHIS's chief vet, sorta answer the written questions. Sorta answer because they know full well that if they answer the really hard questions honestly they are going to get the pitch-fork holding unwashed farmers in their face. How many times do we have to say it? No NAIS!

Anyway, read Chuck's article.

7/10/2009 10:07:00 AM

Jolley: Five Minutes (not) with USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack

For those of you expecting to see the long-promised interview with USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack, let me set the stage. In early June, I traveled to Jefferson City to attend an NAIS listening session. I was joined by several hundred distinctly angry people who wanted to personally give the Secretary a piece of their mind. I�m using the singular version of the word because they were of a common opinion. Many voices, one mind.

One of the first things I heard was the voice of the Secretary explaining his rationale behind calling these meetings. It was delivered by videotape and a longer variation of his initial comment announcing the sessions: "Today, I am asking farmers and stakeholders to engage with USDA in a more productive dialogue about NAIS. Now is the time to have frank and open conversations."

At the table behind me was a big fella in well worn jeans and a very large cowboy hat. To make sure his political leanings were perfectly clear, his shirt was emblazoned with a large round �No NAIS� sticker. He stage-whispered to his friend, �The least the S.O.B. could do is show up and listen.�

Such is the way politics break on this issue, especially in Missouri. It�s a black-and-white, friend-or-enemy state. Vilsack and the USDA? They were the enemy.

I mulled over that farmer�s incendiary comment for a few minutes and decided it was a wise decision for Vilsack to stay away. These events were supposed to be �listening sessions� and an on-site appearance by the Ag Secretary would have only served as a lightning rod for people with a confirmed and unfriendly agenda.

After hearing what everyone had to say, I thought Vilsack ought to have an opportunity to be front-and-center with his constituency on the issue. Listening to his thoughts about these one-sided sessions might help cattlemen understand his position. I contacted Caleb Weaver, Vilsack�s press secretary, and asked if he might be willing to answer a few questions.

NO problem. He asked me to send the questions to him and he would get right back to me with the answers. �Good approach,� I thought. �NAIS is such a politically sensitive subject, I don�t want to mis-read or misunderstand an answer. Better that they be well-thought out and precisely worded.�

We missed the first deadline � the questions got lost along the way. I sent them again and thought the new date might be even better since the deadline would fall just after the final listening session in Omaha. With the responses from all 14 sessions in hand, Vilsack�s answers would be even timelier.

It might help level the journalistic playing field, too. After doing back-to-back �Five Minutes with� columns on the NAIS issue and with anti-NAIS activist, Rhonda Perry, a few words from Vilsack should give my coverage of the issue some needed balance.

I waited for his responses last Thursday � until 11:39 PM. Weaver then emailed a note saying he wasn�t going to be able to deliver in time for last Friday�s Five Minutes With column. �How about next Friday (today),� I asked? NO problem, again. Meanwhile, several people from the No NAIS camp were needling me with comments that the interview would never happen.

Then came the word by email at around noon yesterday. Vilsack would be unable to answer but Dr. John Clifford, the USDA�s chief vet, would respond and his answers were attached. Now I know Dr. Clifford to be a learned and honorable man, well respected by his peers, and normally I would be delighted to interview him.

But, on this issue, he�s not Tom Vilsack.

Still, the core of my questions were aimed at finding out what the USDA had learned during these listening sessions and how the Department might use that knowledge to refine their approach to NAIS. I think you�ll understand their position after reading this column.

The rest of the article, the questions and answers answered by Dr. Clifford and not by that cowering bureaucrat Tom Vilsack, here.

Understanding NAIS and it's many tentacles

2009-07-04T09:29:00.005-04:00

Follows is a public record comment from USDA's request for comments that are being taken until August 8th. If you haven't submitted your comments yet, I urge you to do so but not until you read this one. This succinctly details all the problems with NAIS, all of the industry pandering, the international entanglements, etc. Once you read this you will be able to put it all together in your mind and, with all hope, you will find you have a renewed fire in your belly to fight along side us. We must get consumers to stand with us as well. If you think the prices of food are high now, just wait until they implement NAIS.

Get a cuppa and read on.

Happy 4th of July. I pray it is not our last one of independence.

APHIS-2009-0027-0469.1[1]

Platt Land and Cattle is a large, family owned/operated cow-calf ranch with owned and leased ranches in Arizona and New Mexico. We oppose NAIS in total.

NAIS is simply an unworkable and highly intrusive bureaucratic boondoggle; it is a regulatory proposal for which a need has never been demonstrated and, more importantly, for which USDA has never provided specific citations of statutory and constitutional authority authorizing such action. NAIS should therefore be terminated in total.

More specific comments are as follows:

*1. _No need for NAIS has ever been demonstrated._*

USDA has failed to demonstrate a need for “48-hour trace back.” It has similarly failed to identify what diseases require the imposition on producers of such a costly, onerous, and intrusive program.

Producers, by their failure to register premises and their overwhelming opposition at the listening sessions, have sent a clear message: there is no need for NAIS. These producers have trillions of dollars at stake in livestock, land, equipment and water rights. Their very lives are bound up in that investment. Many have fine educations with degrees in veterinary science, law, and business.

We are left, however, with the preposterous proposition that government, academia, a few veterinarians, and tag/tech manufacturers with no corresponding stake in livestock, land, equipment and water rights know what is best for producers’ livestock herds.

The concept of “48-hour trace back” is from OIE’s Terrestrial Animal Health Code, Article 4.2.2, Performance Criteria, which suggests, as a measure of effect animal ID, that “all animals can be traced to the establishment of birth within 48 hours of an enquiry.”
http://www.oie.int/eng/normes/mcode/en_chapitre_1.4.2.htm

USDA’s use of the word “premises” also comes from the OIE code. The glossary defines “establishment” as used in connection with 48-hour traceback as “the premises in which animals are kept.”
http://www.oie.int/eng/normes/mcode/en_glossaire.htm#sous-chapitre-2

The purpose of the OIE Code is one of assuring “*the sanitary safety of international trade* in terrestrial animals and their products, (emphasis added) http://www.oie.int/eng/normes/en_mcode.htm?e1d10 and in his May 6, 2009, editorial, OIE’s Director General Bernard Vallat proudly proclaims, “One World, One Health.
http://www.oie.int/eng/edito/en_lastedito.htm

During the gathering of the American Association of Bovine Practitioners in Vancouver in September, 2007, former USDA Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs, Bruce Knight, was queried as to why USDA was making such a push for premises registration. His response: “It is quite simple. We want to be in compliance with OIE regulations by 2010.” http://www.r-calfusa.com/news_releases/2009/090507-nais.htm

In short, USDA has been less than transparent and honest with American cattle producers. It has been pushing an animal ID system to benefit industrialized agriculture—those involved in international trade. There can be absolutely no doubt on this point.

On June 11, 2009, Rosa DeLauro, Chairwoman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture issued a press release on the committee’s fiscal year 2010 bill which included the following statement :

*The bill eliminates funding for the National Animal Identification
System (NAIS).* After receiving $142 million in funding since fiscal year 2004, APHIS has yet to put into operation an effective system that would provide needed animal health and *livestock market benefits.* USDA is currently conducting a public listening tour around the country for several months to hear from stakeholders. *Until USDA finishes its listening sessions and provides details as to how it will implement an effective ID system, continued investments into the
current NAIS are unwarranted. *(Emphasis added.)

At the NAIS listening sessions a welcoming video is shown featuring Secretary Vilsack. He asserts that “we will all agree that we need to *protect the livestock markets* and the livelihood of producers” and then continues:

I don’t want us to get to the point where Congress says they will not continue to fund the system. If that were to happen, I would doubt the *reliability of our market* and that’s not where we want to be. (Emphasis added.)

Apart from the fact that his nation is a net importer of beef, what markets are demanding NAIS? If indeed there is such a demand, cannot exporters work privately with producers on an export/ID program? USDA never answers such questions. The fact is that “markets” are not concerned about NAIS. They are concerned about exports which contain Canadian product.

The Korean meat export protocols list as ineligible,

1. Beef and beef products derived from cattle imported from Canada for immediate slaughter ….

2. Beef and beef products derived from cattle imported from Canada that were resident in the U.S. less than 100 days prior to slaughter….

http://www.fsis.usda.gov/Regulations_&_Policies/Republic_of_Korea_Requirements/index.asp

In a June 10, 2003, letter from Toshikazu Ijichi, Japan’s Animal Health Division Director, Dr. Peter Fernandez, Deputy Administrator, Veterinary Services for USDA-APHIS was advised that Japan had “deleted Canada from the list of countries which are eligible to export” beef to Japan “in light of confirmation of a single case of BSE in Canada.”

Dr. Fernandez was further advised that *In order to protect Japan from possible introduction of BSE, I* would like to *ask you again* *not to export beef* and its product which is derived *from* the [sic] cattle born, raised or slaughtered in the
*countries with indigenous BSE cases…to Japan through your country*. Therefore, *I would* like to *ask you again* *to indicate the country of origin *where the cattle from which the exported meat product to Japan was produced were born, raised and slaughtered…. (Emphasis added.)

http://www.r-calfusa.com/Animal_Health/080618Exhibit1-LetterToNewYorkTimes-JapanAnimalHealthLetter.pdf

The notion that export markets are clamoring for the imposition of NAIS is simply not supported by the factual record. Of ironic interest in light of the above letter is USDA’s delay in the implementation—and its frustration of the clear intent—of COOL.

One thing is very clear from the listening sessions: producers, the owners of the animals USDA would ostensibly protect, overwhelmingly reject NAIS and the claimed need therefore. There is a great irony of paternalism—government knows best—vis-à-vis the producer rejection of NAIS in the “listening sessions” and their failure to register their “premises.”

USDA never mentions OIE, its Terrestrial Animal Health Code, and the Codex Alimentarius except by implication when it asserts that NAIS is needed to protect “markets,” a euphemism for trade. It has simply been disingenuous at best, as it panders to industrialized agriculture and ignores its statutory obligation to rural agriculture.

Such pandering has come at great cost to rural producers. Examining USDA
data for the period from 1984 through 2006, farm/ranch share of income
distribution from trade declined by 28% while services’ share doubled
and trade/transportation’s share increased nearly 52%!

Using the period 1982 – 1984 as the base, and adjusting for inflation,
the price of slaughter steers/heifers has declined 57% since 1947 while
the retail beef price index has increased 3%! Today, the United States
is a net importer of beef, some 17% of domestic supply is of foreign
origin. USDA has failed those it was established to serve.

Qui bono? NAIS burdens producers with costs and intrusive regulations to
benefit industrial agriculture and global trade. There are no benefits
for producers in NAIS. Being in the business of accumulating and
wielding power, Government is a beneficiary; the tag and technology
companies will earn increased profits; meat packers will mine data and
industrial agriculture engaged in international trade will likewise
enjoy increased profits.

This is a simple issue of “follow the money.” USDA’s 2005 Strategic Plan
for NAIS states that

In 2002, the National Institute of Animal Agriculture

(NIAA) *initiated meetings that led to* the development of the U.S.

Animal Identification Plan (USAIP). That work provided the

foundation data standards for the National Animal Identification

System (NAIS). (Emphasis added.)
http://wlsb.state.wy.us/brands/Premises/brochure/NAIS_Draft_Strategic_Plan_42505.pdf

An examination of NIAA’s membership list discloses a lengthy list of
tag/tech companies including AgInfoLink, Allflex, Brock’s Cattle-Identi
Company, Cattle-Traq, Destron Fearing, EZ-ID/AVID ID systems, Farnam,
Fort Supply technologies, Meta Farms, Inc., Micro Beef Technologies, and
National Band and Tag, to name a few. The meat packing industry is
represented by Cargill and AMI.
http://animalagriculture.org/aboutNIAA/members/memberdirectory.asp

The head of NIAA’s Animal ID committee is from Allflex.
http://animalagriculture.org/aboutNIAA/committees/AIDIS/animalid.asp

NCBA also appears as a member; however, it entered into a cooperative
agreement with APHIS, taking money to promote premises registration.

http://www.cattlementocattlemen.org/watcPremisesRegistration.aspx

http://www-mirror.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/speeches/content/2007/02/NatlCattlemen2-1-07.shtml

The producer bears all the costs and derives none of the benefits. That,
simply, is the reason for the overwhelming rejection of NAIS by
producers. The listening sessions, if USDA will listen, make that point
beyond cavil.

The existing combination of hot brands, brand inspection, health papers,
auction back tags, and border interdiction of disease has served this
nation well for 100 years. Brucellosis, TB and other livestock diseases
have been effectively controlled while FMD has been unknown in the
country since 1929.

On its website, USDA/APHIS acknowledges that existing “programs have
achieved significant success over the years in reducing animal disease”
but then asserts that “animal disease remains a reality in the U.S. as
illustrated in the following examples.” The two bovine diseases used to
illustrate USDA’s assertion are BSE and TB.
http://animalid.aphis.usda.gov/nais/why/animal_disease.shtml

This is overreaching at its best. BSE has an extended incubation period.
BSE is spread not animal to animal but rather by the use of contaminated
feed. The United States has not had a domestic case of BSE: the two
reported U.S. cases were both atypical which is characterized by an
absence of the spongiform changes in the brain caused by typical BSE.
(Fact Sheet: Atypical BSE, published by NCBA and the Beef Checkoff.)

USDA, through extended litigation with R-CALF USA, fought to open the
U.S. border to Canadian cattle including those over 30-months of age.
Canada does have a BSE problem. USDA further litigated with Creekstone
Farms to prevent that business from voluntarily testing its cattle for BSE.

Canada’s Food Inspection Agency has acknowledged that feed cohorts from
known BSE animals were exported to this country for slaughter. For
example, the CFIA announced that five cohorts of the November, 2008, BSE
Holstein dairy cow were “exported for slaughter.” According to CFIA,
“investigation showed” the feed cohorts “consumed the same potentially
contaminated feed.”
http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/anima/heasan/disemala/bseesb/bccb2008/15investe.shtml

Given USDA’s i) laissez-faire attitude toward the importation of BSE
from Canada, ii) its asserted position that its risk assessments and the
removal of SRMs result in a de minimis risk to consumers, and iii) its
insistence that U.S. producers cannot voluntarily test for BSE, the
contention that BSE is a disease that must now be managed with NAIS is
simply disingenuous.

BSE cannot be managed or prevented by NAIS following its importation.
BSE should never be imported period. Dr. Stanley Prusiner, Nobel Prize
winner for his work in the discovery of prions, the cause of BSE states:

Regardless of whether the tonsils and distal ileum have been removed
from cattle – and in the case of cattle 30 months of age and older, the
brain, eyes, spinal cord, and trigeminal ganglia as well – these
measures are unlikely to be sufficient to ensure the safety of the meat
we consume. *The only reliable way to minimize the risk of humans
developing vCJD from BSE-infected cattle is to eliminate BSE-infected
cattle from the food chain. *(Emphasis added.)

http://www.r-calfusa.com/BSE/081117-Exhibit%207,%20Prusiner%20Declaration.pdf

NAIS will do nothing to eliminate BSE from the food chain. USDA
continues to allow the importation cattle from Canada which undeniably
has a BSE problem. Dr. Prusiner further states that “active testing in
the EU has shown that BSE-infected cattle may display no signs even
though they harbor substantial numbers of prions that can be identified
using a rapid test for BSE.” _Id_.

There is no rapid testing done in the United States and, as previously
mentioned, USDA employed litigation to prevent Creekstone farms from
voluntarily testing cattle. To assert that NAIS is now needed to manage
BSE is an absurdity at best: either USDA with its risk assessments
coupled with the removal of SRMs is correct and there is no BSE risk;
or, Dr. Prusiner is correct and BSE should never be introduced into the
food chain via imported cattle. In either case, NAIS is of no value.

With regard to TB , Audit Report, Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service’s Control Over the Bovine Tuberculosis Program, U.S. Department
of Agriculture, Report No. 50601-0009-Ch, September, 2006. Section 2,
page 19, states:

*Between FYs 2001 and 2005, 75 percent (205 of 272) of the TB cases
detected through slaughter surveillance were determined by APHIS to have
originated from Mexico*. In response, *APHIS has worked with Mexico *to
improve their TB eradication program; *however, these efforts are
undermined by the disease’s 3 to 12 month incubation period. Cattle may
test negative for the disease prior to export, but develop TB and infect
U.S. cattle after import. *Although the majority of TB-infected cattle

found by slaughter surveillance in the United States are from Mexico,
*APHIS has not developed controls to restrict the movement of cattle, or
require additional testing to compensate for the disease’s incubation
period. Until additional controls are added, APHIS cannot reasonably
expect to achieve its goal and *

*eradicate TB when it is being imported into the United States each
year.* */ /*(Emphasis added.)

Page 19 of the Report further noted that Mexico annually “exports 1
million cattle to the United States”; that Mexico has “a higher
prevalence of the disease” such that Mexican cattle “are more likely to
be infected with TB”; that *Mexico has “no accredited-free states” and
in 2004 “reported over 2,000 TB-infected herds…compared to just 10
positive herds reported by the United States”; and that “99 percent of
the cattle imported from Mexico spend time on U.S. premises prior to
slaughter” with such time generally ranging from “5 to 14 months.”
*(Emphasis added.)

Page 20 of the Report states that “despite the higher prevalence of
TB-infected cattle in Mexico, APHIS has not established additional
import controls or requirements to test or restrict the movement of
Mexican cattle after importation to the United States” and that the
cattle so imported “simply become part of the U.S. herds.” The lack of
controls over Mexican cattle “has resulted in infected cattle being
detected in 12 states over the last 5 years.” A chart on page 20 of the
Report shows the states and numbers of TB cases traced to Mexico for FYs
2001-2005. That chart shows 2 in New Mexico and 5 in Arizona.

Page 22 of the Report set forth the conclusion that “*APHIS was under
utilizing…high risk herds” as a tool to “target testing to questionable
areas.” *(Emphasis added.)

In short, USDA’s contention that TB must be managed by NAIS while we
continue to import the disease from Mexico is, like its similar BSE
argument, most disingenuous.

Foot and mouth is another disease which Homeland Security and USDA have
used as a scare tactic. Given USDA’s efforts to regionalize Argentina
and the announced relocation of the Plum Island facility to Kansas,
America’s heartland, the assertion that producers must now embrace NAIS
to combat a potential FMD outbreak is untenable.

There may well be an outbreak of FMD. Unfortunately, it will likely be a
direct result of government action: a leak from the new Kansas facility,
similar to the recent breach at the Surrey facility in England; or, it
will come across our border which USDA refuses to secure and in fact
works to make more porous. NAIS will neither prevent nor mitigate the
damage that will occur under either scenario.

The Canadian Veterinarian Journal, Vol. 50, January, 2009, contained a
60-page report on the containment of England’s 2001 FMD outbreak.
England has long had an animal ID system; however, that system and
“traceback” was not the key to FMD containment in 2001.

The 2001 FMD outbreak was handled by throwing up perimeters and then,
with locals, working in from the perimeter. Similarly, states have
existing plans for handling emergencies which would include a FMD
outbreak. Such an outbreak would be handled as it was in England: a
perimeter would be established with no movement inside the perimeter as
the necessary epidemiology work would then be done from the perimeter
inward.

Animal ID was not utilized to contain the 2001 FMD outbreak nor would it
be of any meaningful benefit were this nation to suffer an outbreak.
Further, it would not identify vehicles and individuals who have been in
contact with contaminated herds; hence, the establishment of a perimeter
with work then directed inward.

Even with TB, a perimeter is established and work is then done inward.
USDA’s handling of the current TB situation in Nebraska well illustrates
this point. NAIS would not alter the course of the investigation.

USDA claims that NAIS is vital in the case of TB as some investigations
have taken up to 160 days. Again, the current Nebraska situation is
instructive. A perimeter is established and herds are investigated
within that perimeter.

What have been possible contacts with the infected herd and what has
happened in the last 12 – 24 months with neighboring herds and cohorts?
USDA postures that the livestock industry has no records, no idea of
where calves may have been sold or cull cows sent.

USDA adduces no evidence to support that assertion beyond its claim of
an investigation of up to 160 days in length. USDA never details what it
did in that 160 period and how much investigative time was on issues for
which NAIS would have been of no benefit.

Producers have records and so do states. Arizona is a brand state. It
has a record of every animal that has left our ranch, where it went, and
who the trucker was. We have similar records. USDA is simply
misrepresenting the state of the livestock industry.

Border interdiction of disease and running a closed herd—which we do in
our operation—are the two best defenses against the introduction of
disease. NAIS is of no benefit to us as producers.

*2. _USDA has neither statutory nor constitutional authority for the
imposition of NAIS; indeed, NAIS represents the implementation of the
OIE Terrestrial Animal Health Code and the Codex Alimentarius, the
adaptation of which is a treaty action never ratified by the Senate as
required by Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution._*

USDA has received repeated requests from multiple organizations for a
specific citation of authority for NAIS. It has never responded, beyond
a generic reference to the Animal Health Protection Act of 2002 coupled
with a broad assertion of authority to "carry out operations and
measures to protect the health of American Agriculture."

That assertion is apparently from 7 USC 8308 and has been taken
completely out of context. That section authorizes USDA to “*carry out*
operations and measures to *detect, control, or eradicate* any pest or
disease of livestock (*including the drawing of blood and diagnostic
testing* of animals), including animals at a slaughterhouse, stockyard,
or other

point of concentration.” (Emphasis added.)

The statutory examples of “operations and measures” are of _overt action
by USDA _ such as drawing of blood and diagnostic testing, all directly
intended to “detect, control, or eradicate” pests or diseases. The
statutory construction doctrines of ejusdem generis and noscitur a
sociis require the general terms “operations and measures” to be
construed in light of the specific terms “drawing of blood and
diagnostic testing.”

The language most certainly does not confer broad authority to mandate
_overt action by producers_ in the form of an animal ID system designed
to track livestock movement; that does not directly and actively
“detect, control, or eradicate” pests or diseases; and which certainly
is not a measure such as “drawing of blood and diagnostic testing.”

Any fair reading of the Act does not permit the assertion of authority
by USDA for NAIS. Further, USDA’s assertion of broad authority cannot be
countenanced under any fair reading of the United States Constitution.
The powers of Congress are not implied, plenary, and inherent, but
rather express, limited and enumerated. USDA’s assertion that Congress
has delegated and granted it broad powers which are implied, plenary and
inherent flies in the face of the clear intent of Article 1, Section 8,
of the U.S. Constitution.

USDA is an administrative agency under the Executive branch of the
federal government and enjoys no powers beyond those expressly granted
it by Congress, acting in turn under the express, limited, and
enumerated powers granted under Article 1, Section 8.

As noted above, USDA is essentially seeking to implement OIE’s
Terrestrial Animal Health Code and the Codex Alimentarius by
administrative fiat. Both Codes are a complex web of international
agreements and actions by numerous countries.
http://www.oie.int/eng/OIE/en_histoire.htm?e1d1;
http://www.oie.int/eng/OIE/organisation/en_structure.htm?e1d1;
http://www.oie.int/eng/OIE/actes/en_accords.htm

The net effect of an implementation of NAIS by administrative fiat would
be the enforcement upon American producers of international standards
agreed to by various countries. Those standards are, in essence,
treaties much like the free trade agreements which required the consent
of the Senate. That body has never considered the agreements comprising
the two codes.

The very fact of disagreement between producers and USDA over the
necessity of NAIS underscores the need for transparent debate,
deliberation, and consideration by the Senate.

Even if the two codes are not construed as treaties, they are most
certainly a regulation of commerce with foreign nations, a power
reserved to Congress, not to USDA as an administrative agency under the
executive branch of government. USDA simply has no power, statutorily or
constitutionally, to mandate NAIS.

*3. _The regulatory and enforcement provisions of NAIS are unknown and
its underlying premise is suspect._*

Inherent in NAIS is the assumption of an errorless system; i.e., that i)
no cattle will ever lose ear tags, ii) that the tags will always
function and not succumb to the effects of weather and sun, iii) that
all dead and missing cattle can be accounted for, iv) that all movements
of cattle can and will be accurately scanned, v) that the data so
scanned will always be properly registered, vi) that the data so
uploaded will always be properly received vii) that the data so received
will be always be properly recorded and viii) that the data will always
be retrievable.

USDA has no concept of the conditions under which cattle producers
operate, how cattle are handled, what facilities will actually be
required to read and scan tags, of weather—heat, cold, wet, dry,
dust—under which NAIS would function. It has no concept of a lack of
internet access to upload information. The errorless system envisioned
by USDA is simply not a real world scenario.

There is no duplication or redundancy as is the case in our present
system. The concept of 48-hour trace back, while beguiling, is actually
inferior to the present system due to the duplication and redundancy in
the existing system.

England has experienced problems with its ID program with a cow herd
that is substantially smaller than the U.S. herd. According to a
November, 2003, House of Commons Report, the entire population of
cattle, sheep and pigs in England was a mere 25 million. In contrast,
there are nearly 100 million cattle in the United States.

The livestock industry in England is on a much smaller scale than in the
U.S.; yet, according to the October 12, 2008, issue of the /Telegraph/,

In a situation described as udder chaos, officials at the Department for
Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) admitted in Parliamentary
questions that 20,979 of the animals had been mislaid.

The livestock should have been logged on Defra's Cattle Tracing System,
devised to protect public and animal health after the BSE and foot and
mouth epidemics.

However the cattle have disappeared from the system, while another 1039
are believed to have been loaded onto cattle trucks and never heard of
again, according to the Daily Star.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/3182720/Defra-admits-losing-20000-cows-in-Britain.html

The same article noted that Britain’s Ministry of Defence had lost a
computer hard drive containing the private details of 100,000 members of
the Armed Forces and that the Home Office had lost a memory stick
containing data on 84,000 prisoners in England and Wales.

Such experiences are not unique to England. USDA itself has had similar
incidents.

In 2007, USDA inadvertently published the social security numbers of
63,000 people on the internet.
http://www.technewsworld.com/story/security/57029.html?wlc=1243391840

Also in 2007, USDA had computers stolen containing sensitive information
about farmers. http://seclists.org/isn/2007/Mar/0060.html

In 2006, USDA’s office of Inspector General, in its annual audit,
concluded that the “Agriculture Department continues to suffer from
inadequate management and monitoring of IT security controls, both at
the department-level and in its agencies.”
http://gcn.com/articles/2006/10/20/usda-security-improvements-still-not-effective-ig.aspx

Indeed, USDA has been given the lowest possible marks for 5 straight
years on federal computer report card grades by the House Government
Reform Committee. http://www.internetnews.com/security/article.php/3615831

John Carter, former chairman of the Australian Beef Association and
whose family holds the oldest registered brand in that country, reports
that 20% of the cattle in the NLIS data base are missing; that a
personal audit of his NLIS data base shows that less than 50% of the
animals he has sold are so reflected in the data base; than a “trace
back trial” of 300 head of cattle could track only 75% and that the
remaining 25% could be tracked only through Australia’s traditional
“paper trail.”* * Carter states that NLIS has “produced a shambles.”

The notion that NAIS is a technologically feasible means of tracing 100
million head of cattle is not supported by existing evidence. USDA’s own
record with computers, theft, hacking and other security breaches
coupled with animal ID experiences in England and Australia well
demonstrate that it is a system that should be rejected.

What will happen when cattle movements are not accurately scanned,
registered, transmitted, or received? There will be discrepancies and
irregularities in data. How heavy handed will USDA be in such instances?
Most producers have experience with federal agencies and in many cases,
it is not favorable.

In our own experience, dealing with TB in New Mexico, we have found the
agency and its rules to be heavy handed with demands which, by its own
admission, have no rational basis.

USDA has given no indication to producers of how NAIS will be enforced
and discrepancies/irregularities handled. If England is any indication,
producers can expect heavy-handed enforcement.

According to London’s /Telegraph/, Cheshire dairyman David Dobbins had
567 head of dairy cattle destroyed by DEFRA as a consequence of ID
paperwork “irregularities” notwithstanding that DEFRA “failed to explain
how many or what these were.” Prior to the destruction of the animals.
Mr. Dobbins records were seized by DEFRA, negating his ability to even
respond to DEFRA’s noncompliance assertions.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1545862/Christopher-Bookers-notebook.html

One fears that NAIS will bring similar events upon the heads of this
nation’s cattle producers

*4. _USDA has spent well in excess of $140 million promoting premises
registration and NAIS. This expenditure is most irresponsible at a time
when this nation is—in essence—bankrupt. This nation simply cannot
afford any more such frivolous expenditures._*

In the face of the hundreds of billions and indeed trillions of dollars
which the Federal Government has thrown about the last several months,
USDA’s NAIS expenditures are minuscule. Nevertheless, it is an
expenditure of money which the federal government simply does not have.

The May 30, 2009, issue of /USA Today/ reported numbers previously
discussed in various sources by David Walker, former U.S. Comptroller
General who resigned in disgust following Congressional inaction on his
annual report to Congress. The total unfunded liabilities of the Federal
Government now total a record $63.8 trillion, a sum equal to $546,668
for every U.S. household!

Estimates are that only around 1% of U.S. households have a net worth
sufficient to pay their proportionate share of the $63.8 trillion in
debt. In short, this nation is bankrupt.

Continued spending on NAIS, a program for which, as discussed above, no
need has ever been demonstrated is simply irresponsible given this
nation’s financial condition.

NAIS should immediately be terminated and not a single additional dollar
spent thereon.

* *

*5. _USDA has no credibility with producers and there is no on the
ground support for NAIS, without which it simply cannot succeed._*

At all of the listening sessions—through Albuquerque on June 16—two
salient facts emerged: there is widespread mistrust of USDA among
producers and there is virtually no producer support for NAIS. A chasm,
a gulf exists between USDA and producers.

NAIS was never intended to be voluntary. Several comments in the 2005
Strategic Plan underscore this:

-- NAIS must be implemented/ /(USDA Secretary Mike Johanns)

-- We have been working on an animal identification plan here at

USDA…over a number of years now, and our goal

has remained consistent—to be able to track animals within a 48-

hour period. We are prepared to roll up our sleeves and get this

implemented…. NAIS is a top USDA priority. (William “Bill”

Hawks Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs)

-- [W]e move forward to implement NAIS. (John R. Clifford, Deputy

Administrator Veterinary Services)

(Page 2, Strategic Plan)
http://wlsb.state.wy.us/brands/Premises/brochure/NAIS_Draft_Strategic_Plan_42505.pdf

The Plan claimed that “stakeholders provide broad support for national
animal identification” and in its timeline listed January, 2009, as the
target date by which “Reporting of defined animal movements [will be]
required; [and the] entire program [becomes] mandatory.”

USDA pulled out all stops. In Colorado, 4-H children were prohibited
from showing livestock at the state fair unless their parents had
registered their “premises.” Money was given to FFA in the hope of
cajoling parents.

The Plan was changed to become “voluntary” and NAIS morphed from an
animal health plan to a marketing tool; then it became a means of
assuring consumers that their beef is wholesome—a food safety issue;
finally, the trump card of bio-terrorism was played.

Four years later, and following some $140 million to register
“premises”—much of it bribe money handed out to “partners” in an effort
to enlist their support—only some 30% of “premises” have been registered.

In many states, however, when dairies, feeding, hog and poultry
operations, are excluded, less than 10% of cattle producers have
registered. Missouri is such an example.

Having played all its cards of crisis, USDA’s plan had nevertheless run
amuck. There was no “stakeholder” support. USDA, fond of the term
“stakeholder” had forgotten that the only real “stakeholders” were those
producers on the ground who actually owned the cattle that were to be
the subject of NAIS.

USDA apparently assumed that producers were red-necked bumpkins who
could be coached into compliance by smooth talking bureaucrats in Brooks
Brothers suits singing the soothing song of the voluntary nature of NAIS.

USDA’s next target for bamboozlement was Congress. At the March 11 NAIS
hearing earlier this year before the House Agricultural Subcommittee on
Livestock, Dairy and Poultry, USDA stacked the deck. The first “panel”
consisted of but a single individual: APHIS’ Dr. John Clifford who was
given over one hour to advocate for NAIS.

There was but a single independent cattle producer invited to give
testimony, R-CALF’s Dr. Max Thornsberry, who was afforded a mere five
minutes of time.

All other panel members were* *representatives of government (Dr.
Williams and Mr. St. Cry); were representatives of groups who were had
taken, directly or indirectly, bribe money from USDA to promote NAIS*
*under the euphemism of “co-operative agreements” (Mr. Nutt, Dr. Jordan,
and Mr. Butler); or were former USDA/APHIS employees (Dr. Ron DeHaven.)

Chairman Scott, during a brief discussion on foot and mouth, seized on a
reference to the highly contagious nature of bovine FMD and a mention of
potential airborne contamination to try and connect human health with
bovine FMD. Specifically, Chairman Scott suggested that NAIS was
necessary to protect humans from contracting bovine FMD. USDA’s Dr.
Clifford did nothing to correct Chairman Scott’s misapprehension.

There is a human form of FMD which is “a common viral illness of infants
and children” but it is “*not related*” to the bovine disease. (See the
website for the Center for Disease Control and its discussion of the
human form http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dvrd/revb/enterovirus/hfhf.htm

)

Misconception manifested itself again when Representative Conaway asked
Dr. Clifford about the triggering event for a 48-hour traceback under
NAIS. Representative Conaway’s question was in the context of a boy in
Philadelphia who becomes ill after he has eaten a hamburger.

Traceback of live animals has nothing to do with traceback of E. coli,
which was underlying Representative Conaway’s question. There is
presently no traceback system from the consumption of meat to the
processing facility or meat packing plant which would be the source of
contamination. NAIS does nothing to change this: traceability would stop
at the processing plant door.

As he had done with Chairman Scott and the misconception on FMD and a
perceived risk to human health, Dr. Clifford did nothing to correct
Representative Conaway’s erroneous conception that NAIS had something to
do with tracing of E. coli in contaminated meat. In short, Dr. Clifford
allowed the erroneous conception that NAIS was a human health and food
safety issue to go unchallenged.

Having engaged in such misleading conduct, USDA initiated listening
sessions, handing out materials including a May 7 “Dear Participant”
letter under the signature of John Clifford. There are interesting
phrases in that letter:

n We need to work *collaboratively* to resolve concerns *and move
forward with animal tracebility*

n NAIS is a *cooperative effort*

n Much more work is needed to *fully implement NAIS*

n *Together* we can develop a system that we an all support.

Inherent in those phrases is a determination on the part of USDA to
proceed with NAIS, notwithstanding total producer opposition thereto.
Producers will be spun as rejecting the reasonable overtures of a wise
USDA. The platitude of wanting to listen and hear producer input is a
velvet glove masking an iron fist.

Several states have statutes prohibiting a mandatory NAIS. How will that
be handled? In a system of federalism, does USDA really have ultimate
authority over livestock? Does Article 1, Section 8, of the federal
Constitution in fact negative much of the Animal Health Protection Act
relied on by USDA? At the Albuquerque listening session, one Navajo
speaker suggested that the tribes may not accept a mandatory NAIS. How
will the issue of tribal sovereignty be resolved? Does USDA really wish
to force a constitutional confrontation on these points?

USDA may mandate NAIS but in the process will further alienate
producers. The existing gulf will become an unbridgeable chasm.
Enforcement will make criminals of law abiding citizens as producers are
jailed and their property subjected to confiscatory fines to coerce
compliance. Is this what USDA truly desires?

In our operation, we will simply not comply with NAIS, even if it is
made mandatory. We are weary of an intrusive government and the fights
associated therewith. Rather than continuing to submit to intrusive,
heavy-handed regulation, we would choose to exit the business. There is
no joy in serfdom on one’s own land and with one’s own animals.

We respectfully urge Secretary Vilsack to close down shop with NAIS and
to began a new dawn of rebuilding bridges with producers, working with
us rather than with industrialized agriculture, to fulfill USDA’s
express statutory mandate and be about the business of improving “the
quality of life for people living in the rural and nonmetropolitan
regions of the nation.” 7 USC 2204 (a).

That mandate is a true cooperative effort, one that can be achieved
without the expenditure of vast sums of money, without onerous
regulations but rather by simply working to rehabilitate commodity
markets, restoring them as true markets where prices reflect supply and
demand and not the oligopsonistic bargaining power and market
manipulation by industrialized agriculture coupled with speculation by
hedge funds and individuals who have never and will never own a cow.

As producers, our livelihood is more dependent on fixing broken domestic
markets than it is on expanding foreign markets and implementing an ID
system that provides a false sense of security for herd health.

Stop NAIS now and actually help producers do what they do best: produce.
Currently, USDA’s policies would castrate and bid the gelding be fruitful.

Because you asked!

2009-06-20T18:42:00.004-04:00

Someone near and dear to me, someone at the heart of my heart, asked me why I wasn't posting on my blog about HR 875. I told her that it made me too mad/sad to write about. But because she asked, I'll post something.

Henry Waxman drafted HR 2749, a "food safety" bill. (For some reason, it has now been passed to Dingel who already had one, HR 759.)

There are some very alarming provisions to the bill:


1.	HR 2749 would give FDA the power to order a quarantine of a geographic area, including "prohibiting or restricting the movement of food or of any vehicle being used or that has been used to transport or hold such food within the geographic area." Under this provision, farmers markets and local food sources could be shut down, even if they are not the source of the contamination. The agency can halt all movement of all food in a geographic area.
2.	HR 2749 would empower FDA to make random warrantless searches of the business records of small farmers and local food producers, without any evidence whatsoever that there has been a violation. Even farmers selling direct to consumers would have to provide the federal government with records on where they buy supplies, how they raise their crops, and a list of customers.
3.	HR 2749 charges the Secretary of Health and Human Services with establishing a tracing system for food. Each "person who produces, manufactures, processes, packs, transports, or holds such food" would have to "maintain the full pedigree of the origin and previous distribution history of the food," and "establish and maintain a system for tracing the food that is interoperable with the systems established and maintained by other such persons." The bill does not explain how far the traceback will extend or how it will be done for multi-ingredient foods. With all these ambiguities, it's far from clear how much it will cost either the farmers or the taxpayers.
4.	HR 2749 creates severe criminal and civil penalties, including prison terms of up to 10 years and/or fines of up to a total of $100,000 for individuals.
5.	HR 2749 would impose an annual registration fee of $500 on any "facility" that holds, processes, or manufactures food. Although "farms" are exempt, the agency has defined "farm" narrowly. And people making foods such as lacto-fermented vegetables, cheeses, or breads would be required to register and pay the fee, which could drive beginning and small producers out of business during difficult economic times.
6.	HR 2749 would empower FDA to regulate how crops are raised and harvested. It puts the federal government right on the farm, dictating to our farmers.

Some are calling HR 2749 a Totalitarian Control of the Food Supply.

Farm-To-Consumer-Legal-Defense-Fund has a full analysis of the bill. You can read it here, but here is their conclusion:

The FSEA gives the Food and Drug Administration tremendous power while making the agency less accountable for its actions. It fails to describe how the resources it provides are to be allocated. The industrial food system and food imports are badly in need of effective regulation, but the bill does nothing to prevent FDA from concentrating a disproportionate amount of its resources on local food producers.

The stated purpose of the FSEA is to “improve the safety of food in the global market.” It was disclosed at the June 3rd hearing that, out of the 378,000 food facilities that have registered with FDA, 220,000 of them are foreign facilities that export to the United States. Rep. Dingell commented that the percentage of our food coming from out of the country will increase in the future. This creates massive food insecurity in our country, yet the bill continues to push the federal government’s policy of food interdependence.

While information FDA obtains may be exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act [5 USC 52(a)], it may still be provided “to any foreign government agency; or any international organization established by law, treaty or other governmental action and having responsibility–to facilitate global or regional of harmonization of standards and requirements in an area of responsibility of the Food and Drug Administration; or to promote and coordinate public health efforts . . .” [section 112(b)(4)–p. 71].

Food security is achieved by becoming as self-sufficient as possible in food production. Lessening the regulatory burden on small farms and local artisanal producers will improve both food security and food safety. If the FSEA is implemented, many small producers will not have the economies of scale to be able to comply with its onerous requirements.

The Food Safety Enhancement Act needs to be defeated. Any food safety bill should target industrial food processors and imports while leaving the local food system alone. Readers need to contact their Representatives to urge them to oppose the bill. To contact legislators by zip code, use the finder tool at www.Congress.org or call the Capitol Switchboard at 202-224-3121.

Love ya, darlin'.

Live from Jefferson City, MO - Truth for Tuesday

2009-06-08T17:04:00.003-04:00

This week Truth Farmer, Doreen Hannes, will be coming to you live from the Jefferson City NAIS "Listening Session" and Protest. Sharon Zecchinelli will be helping run the show, and we will be visiting with fellow activists and discussing the Listening Session and the USDA reaction. Join us at 1pm EST on Tuesday June 9th for another informative show on the NAIS and life in the sights of the opponents of freedom.

We will NOT comply!!!

Click on the links below to hear Truth farmer on Tuesday from 1pm EST to 3pm EST:

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/Sentinel_Radio/2009/06/09/Truth-Farmer-with-Doreen

http://www.tsrn.us/blog/show-schedule/

Feel Free to call in after the first half hour, the number is (646) 727-2652.

RACHEL MADDOW DESTROYS OBAMA ON LYING TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE

2009-05-28T19:42:00.003-04:00

NAIS is just one peak on the tip of the iceberg. I know you know that already.

Please, watch this video. It is very important that you do so. In it the Usurper announces that Congress and the President's men are going to craft new laws that will enable them to arrest people for crimes they haven't yet committed and detain them indefinitely without a trial. Remember Minority Report?

USDA Dog and Pony Shows, er, Listening Sessions

2009-05-25T10:19:00.004-04:00

Follows is a recap of the listening sessions from R-Calf. What is it about NO that USDA doesn't understand?

Recap of Completed Listening Sessions:

USDA has now held five of its seven scheduled NAIS listening sessions. USDA is running into fierce opposition from livestock producers across the country and, importantly, they are learning first hand that R-CALF USA is a national organization as R-CALF USA members have testified at each session in strong opposition to NAIS. We have not yet heard a report about today’s Louisville, Kentucky session but here’s a brief recap of the five that have been held:

For the Harrisburg, PA, listening session, R-CALF USA member Darol Dickinson wrote a very informative report that you can read at www.naisSTINKS.com. He states that 187 people asked to speak but only 36 were allowed to make presentations. Of those who did speak, 27 were opposed and only 4 favored NAIS.

At the Pasco, WA, listening session, about 50 people participated with 31 against NAIS and only 4 or 5 were in favor. R-CALF USA members made strong presentations and were also quoted in media reports. The Associated Press headline read, “Peeved ranchers lambast federal effort to ID herd animals.” R-CALF USA members Bert and Kathy Smith provided a report of the meeting and stated, “Bert and I were surprised at the passion o thers voiced against the USDA itself. Where once the USDA may have been viewed a friend of the industry, cow/calf producers don’t feel that way now. There is a high level of mistrust of the USDA, its officials, and its motives. Most view NAIS as a means to control farmers and ranchers and their land, not as a means of controlling disease. If the USDA were really concerned about disease control, our borders would be closed to questionable imports and inspection standards would be more stringent.”

At the Austin, TX, listening session, R-CALF USA Director Stayton Weldon and several other R-CALF USA members were among the 150 participants and they expressed strong opposition to NAIS. Stayton Weldon reported that 55 presenters were strongly against NAIS and only 7 were in favor. He said the crowd was very angry and USDA was unable to lead a discussion on possible alternatives.

At the Birmingham, AL, listening session, R-CALF USA Director George Chambers and several other R-CALF USA members were among the 189 people in attendance and among the 27 speakers who were passionately against NAIS. Only 2 were in favor. George Chambers reported that comments were made about how NAIS would already be implemented if it wasn’t for “those pesky R-CALF USA folks.” R-CALF USA’s strong presence – as represented by individual members and not staff, at each of these sessions is sending a strong signal to USDA that R-CALF USA is a strong national organization and it does represent the interests of the vast majority of livestock producers. This will certainly help us, not only in defeating NAIS, but also in advancing our other member-developed policies. George Chambers said he signed up 6 new R-CALF USA members during the meeting.

Upcoming Sessions:

There are two more meetings officially planned (we’ll report on today’s KY meeting next week):

9:00 a.m. Wednesday, May 27, 2009 Storrs, CT
University of Connecticut
Storrs Campus - Bishop Center
One Bishop Circle
Storrs, CT 06269

9:00 a.m. Monday, June 1, 2009

Loveland, CO
The Ranch
Larimer County Fairgrounds and
Events Complex
5280 Arena Circle, Suite 100
Loveland, CO 80538

We strongly recommend that anyone who can should go to these two remaining sessions. We need to keep up the huge momentum that continues to build against NAIS. The larger each of the crowds, the greater our opportunity to stop NAIS.

Also, USDA officials at this week’s sessions stated that more listening sessions will be held. However, there has not been any official announcement by USDA, so we can’t rely on it. [update: There are more listening sessions scheduled now. See NoNAIS post here. ~ Hen]

How to Submit Comments:

For those unable to attend any of the sessions, you can submit written comments online here. The Docket No. for these listening sessions is APHIS-2009-0027-0001
(you should include this Docket No. on your written comments). A deadline has not been established. We recommend you send your comments by midnight, June 1, 2009 unless we receive other instructions.

A bit counterintuitive

2009-05-18T12:57:00.006-04:00

Take a moment to watch this video from R-CALF explaining why NAIS is flawed. After that, make plans to attend one of the listening sessions that USDA has arranged.
NAIS Listening Session Schedule [link opens in new window, so you can come right back!]

NAIS Stinks has a report on the first listening session last week in Harrisburg. While you are there, print out some of the helpful flyers to take with you or to post on bulletin boards in your neighborhood feedstores. Be a 10 minute activist this week. Get many to turn out for the listening sessions. Now is the time. Later might be too late.

While you are at it, order one of my books, First They Came for the Cows, to take with you to the listening session you will go to. It will show your solidarity.

"Don't come crawling to us", John Clifford, APHIS

2009-05-07T09:42:00.003-04:00

Now the USDA, standing behind the apron of Congress to make NAIS happen even though they hear the message that we, the people do not want it, has invoked Dept. of Homeland Security to shake their big stick to make it seem more serious.

And, they conveniently pulled in the Swine Flu/H1N1 scare:
“The emergence of new viruses further demonstrates our need to not only be prepared to react to disease outbreaks, but to also undertake the necessary mitigation and research efforts that allow us to stay one step ahead,” said Committee on Homeland Security Chairman Bennie G. Thompson of Mississippi."

USDA/APHIS continues with it's intentional misinformation "Clifford says that while a strong infrastructure is in place for NAIS, with only 35% participation, the effectiveness of the program is hampered. There has been pressure to make the program mandatory and Clifford said that all available options need to be studied with stakeholders before any decision is made." The number is more along the lines of 9%.
Read this article to understand the truth behind the misinformation.

Tuesday, May 5 – 200 p.m.
Subcommittee on Livestock, Dairy, and Poultry —Joint Public Hearing with the Committee on Homeland Security’s Subcommittee on Emerging Threats, Cybersecurity, and Science and Technology.
RE: To review the National Animal Identification System.

Panel I

Dr. John R. Clifford, Deputy Administrator for Veterinary Services, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C.
Dr. Thomas McGinn, Chief Veterinarian, Office of Health Affairs, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Washington, D.C.

Panel II

Dr. David C. Smith, Assistant Director, Division of Animal Industry, New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets, Albany, New York
Dr. Jerry R. Gillespie, Former Director of Western Institute for Food Safety and Security, University of California, Davis, Hopland, California
Mr. Kevin M. Kirk, Special Assistant to the Division Director, Michigan Department of Agriculture, Animal Industry Division, Lansing, Michigan

In my next blog post I will talk to you about the 7 listening sessions the USDA is holding around the country beginning next week. There is information you need to know regarding the 'consensus building' sessions in the afternoon. Right now I have to go make a bigger pen for the chicks to move to.

Cartoon that says it all

2009-04-28T13:28:00.002-04:00

Hat tip to nonaiswa.org

And it begins

2009-04-10T20:36:00.004-04:00

Just a, ahem, taste of what lies ahead if the food safety bills are not stopped.

Pennsylvania Pie Fight: State Cracks Down on Baked Goods

Inspector Nabs Homemade Desserts At St. Cecilia Church's Lenten Fish Fry

By KRIS MAHER

ROCHESTER, Pa. -- On the first Friday of Lent, an elderly female parishioner of St. Cecilia Catholic Church began unwrapping pies at the church. That's when the trouble started.

A state inspector, there for an annual checkup on the church's kitchen, spied the desserts. After it was determined that the pies were home-baked, the inspector decreed they couldn't be sold.

"Everyone was devastated," says Josie Reed, a 69-year-old former teacher known for her pumpkin and berry pies.

Sold for $1 a slice, homemade pies have always been part of the Lenten fish-fry dinners at St. Cecilia's, located in this tiny city near Pittsburgh. Similar dinners are held in church basements and other venues across the country this time of year.

Kris Maher/The Wall Street Journal

After a state crackdown forbidding the sale of homemade pies, members of St. Cecilia Catholic Church in Rochester, Pa., proceeded with their annual Lenten fish fries anyway. The pie flap helped draw healthy crowds.

Kris Maher/The Wall Street Journal

The problem is the pies are illegal in Pennsylvania. Under the state's food-safety code, facilities that provide food at four or more events in a year require at least a temporary eating and drinking license, and food has to be prepared in a state-inspected kitchen. Many churches have six fish fries a year, on Fridays during Lent. St. Cecilia's has always complied with having its kitchen licensed, so food made there is fine to serve. But homemade goods don't make the cut.

The disappearance of Mary Pratte's coconut-cream pie, Louise Humbert's raisin pie and Marge Murtha's "farm apple" pie from the fish-fry fund-raisers sparked an uproar that spread far beyond the small parish. The local paper dubbed it "piegate," and a nearby bakery donated pies to the church to help fill the gap at the dessert table. There are reports of other churches continuing to sell contraband pastries. Legislation to overturn the baked-goods ban is being discussed.

The Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture declined to make the inspector available for comment. Bill Chirdon, the department's food-safety director, says it has cited only one church in the past three years for unsanitary conditions. In that case, he says the church held outside picnics every week and let food sit in the sun and didn't respond to changes recommended by food-safety inspectors.

Mr. Chirdon says the pie episode has shed light on an often-overlooked aspect of food safety. "I've gotten a lot of letters from churches that are tattletaling on churches down the street that aren't licensed and don't meet standards for food service."

Fish fries gained popularity from the requirement that Catholics abstain from eating meat on Fridays during Lent, a period of 40 days of prayer and penitence that represents the time that Jesus Christ spent in the desert fasting before beginning his public ministry. The dinners are also a way for parishioners to bond as Easter approaches.

But the meals are a vital fund-raising tool, too. The events provide income to fix leaky roofs and to subsidize tuition at parochial schools, for example. "It's a way of helping to raise funds with a minimum number of volunteers," says Rev. Ronald P. Lengwin, a spokesman for the Catholic Diocese of Pittsburgh.

The Pittsburgh diocese, which includes St. Cecilia's, projects overall revenue to be flat this year, while costs are up. In March, the diocese said it would close four elementary schools at the end of this school year.

Meanwhile, home-baked pies continue to be sold at many other fish fries. At a fry in the school cafeteria of a Catholic church on the outskirts of Pittsburgh, the fish-fry director said they never bake pies at the school. Instead, parishioners bake pies, cookies, cakes and cupcakes and bring them in. Donations like those help keep costs down, he says. As for the regulation requiring goods to be baked on the premises, he said, "We're ignoring it. Don't tell anyone."

The ruckus at St. Cecilia's could lead to changes in Pennsylvania state law. State Sen. Elder Vogel Jr. has drafted legislation aimed at allowing nonprofits, including churches, to serve food prepared at home. That would cover fish fries held during Lent. "Once again, you've got the heavy hand of government coming in," he says. "These ladies bake pies, out of the goodness of their hearts."

Sen. Vogel, who sits on the state legislature's agriculture committee, says state officials seem willing to change the law. "They have more work on their hands than going after little old ladies baking pies."

The inspector's warning to St. Cecilia's carried no fine. But the inspector has raised some hackles by telling the women that the state would allow them to bake pies for sale in their own kitchens, if they paid $35 to have them inspected as well.

"Well, that's just ridiculous," says Ms. Humbert, 73, one of the parish bakers. She has been bringing raisin pies to the church for more than a decade and says she thought the women's kitchens "are probably a lot cleaner than some restaurants," but might not meet "nitpicky" requirements.

Michael Greb

Ms. Pratte, 88, has been attending St. Cecilia's since she was a girl. She missed a step and spent two and a half weeks in the hospital earlier this year. She said it would be "kind of hard" to get to the church to do any baking. "I'd rather just make them at home," she says of her coconut-cream pies. Others say it's difficult to bake good pies in a strange oven.

Thanks to the publicity caused by the crackdown, the St. Cecilia's fish fries attracted more visitors than ever before. The church has cleared about $3,500 on each fry, according to Father Michael Greb, pastor of the church, who notes that regular donations are down about 10%. The fish fries are the church's biggest fund-raiser of the year.

Fish dinners, either baked or fried, cost $8.50 and are served with french fries, baked potato or two pierogis. Cole slaw costs 75 cents. The church typically goes through several hundred pounds of haddock and cod per fry and at least 20 pies.

On a recent Friday, the smell of frying fish wafted from a downstairs kitchen and dining hall to the upstairs foyer with its nearly life-size crucifix. Father Greb wore a Pittsburgh Pirates baseball cap and jacket over his black clerical clothes and sat in the brightly lit hall at a table with parishioners.

Some people had suggested that the women put their homemade pies in boxes to make them appear they had been purchased. But everyone insisted they hadn't.

Diane Rotuna, 62, said she donated two apple pies that she purchased from a local grocery chain, "just to keep it legit."

********************

Yupfarming has some good information that you might want to know about the politics of this event. One thing Yupfarming mentioned in their article Beware homemade pie and a glass of milk is:

Bill Chirdon, mentioned below, is the same Bill Chirdon responsible for raids against Mark Nolt, a horse and buggy Mennonite dairy farmer , in Pennsylvania. Chirdon, before he became part of Pennsylvania's Department of Agriculture's new policing power over traditional community food, the worked for industry - Dean Foods and Hershey's. [click here to read the post in full]

It should be mentioned here that under HR 875 the scenario will be played out over and over in every backyard garden in this country. Grow some tomatoes, make a pasta sauce, put it in a lasagna and take it to a church social. You have just crossed over into being a food processor.

Homosexual marriage veto overturned in Vermont

2009-04-07T14:37:00.003-04:00

Ok. So be it. You got your way by way of bullying and threatening the legislature. Be happy now, will you? Remember that the divorce rate is 50% among heterosexuals, so determine to be a good example.

I'll say this; what can come of two people of the same gender getting a license from the state to be permitted to share resources? Nothing but shared resources.

A union between two people of the same gender can't produce children, though I know lesbians who have gotten in vitro fertilization and had children. I worry for the boy children of such unions because what does their parents homosexuality tell them?

If marriage is no longer an exclusive union between a man and woman then who is to say it has to be limited to just two people, or people at all?

My moral guide, Christ Jesus, says that homosexuality is an abomination. I'll stick with him and stay safe in these coming times.

Debbie Stockton of the National Independent Consumers & Farmers Association (NICFA), and Tim Wightman discuss HR 875 with Glenn Beck

2009-03-28T16:28:00.003-04:00

Glenn Beck 3/27/09

Tonight, March 27th, Glenn Beck with Deb Stockton from NICFA

2009-03-27T13:19:00.002-04:00

WHAT: Glenn Beck show, Fox News

WHEN: Tonight, Friday March 27, 5:00 EASTERN TIME

WHERE: Your Fox News channel

WHY: To discuss HR 875, the Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009

Deborah Stockton, representing NICFA, and another yet unnamed person from the small farmer position will be on the Glenn Beck show tonight to discuss the potential ramifications of HR875.

Deborah Stockton, Executive Director

National Independent Consumers and Farmers Association (NICFA)

Food Safety, all the rage

2009-03-26T09:47:00.007-04:00

Our own Roger Allbee in this morning's Burlington FreePress. Just be aware that his reference to Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) comes from the FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN).

Good Agricultural Practices are "practices that address environmental, economic and social sustainability for on-farm processes, and result in safe and quality food and non-food agricultural products" (FAO COAG 2003 GAP paper).

So, in other words, the UN is driving the standards of agriculture in Vermont and Roger Allbee is a part of its implementation.

My Turn: Food safety more important than ever

Even in dark economic times, there is a strong positive energy and passion for agriculture in Vermont. This passion was highlighted by the nearly 100 people who turned out to testify about agriculture at a public farm forum held by the Legislature recently.

The variety of topics and concerns brought up as well as the individuals in attendance underscore the diversity of agriculture in Vermont and the vital role it plays in our communities, society and economic well-being. A recent survey showed Vermonters (over 97 percent) place great value for their quality of life on the state's working landscape and heritage.

Agriculture means big business to Vermont. The dairy industry alone contributes over $2 billion to Vermont's economy, with over 15,000 jobs directly or indirectly associated with agriculture. And it is critical that we maintain current food safety standards in Vermont.

Recent U.S. Census figures show that agriculture is indeed growing and expanding in Vermont. The number of farms increased by 6 percent from 2002 to 2007, with a trend toward starting and operating smaller, diversified farms. Vermont is at the vanguard of emerging sectors like agricultural tourism, New England wine and spirits production, artisan cheese, and the high-quality specialty foods that have created a brand name for our state around the world. Vermont's farmers are both the traditional center of our communities and our greatest entrepreneurs.

Today we are seeing a return of consumers to buying local. I call this a "renaissance of the past." The excitement and passion expressed by our farmers is mirrored in consumers. This excitement is particularly strong as consumers return to buying local, learning where their food comes from and developing new skills in working with locally available ingredients. Increasingly, we are also creating long-term customers from visitors who enjoy a Vermont experience and continue to buy Vermont products, often online, after they have left.

Vermont's reputation for quality and the highest of standards is why companies locate here -- to capitalize on the Vermont brand name. And consumers seek Vermont products because they know they are fresh and safe.

But we have also learned from our past. Some issues raised at the farm forum included regulations in relation to dairy and meat processing in the state. Over the years, safety measures have been developed to protect consumers' health and our food supply, and that protects our producers, as well. In fact, many retail outlets are now requiring local producers to obtain Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) certification before they will sell their products. As a state, we need to do everything in our power to make sure Vermont products are safe, consumers are protected, and farmers have the ability to produce the high-quality products we are known for.

Over 60 percent of milk and dairy products produced in Vermont are consumed by several million people within a few hours of Vermont. Companies like Ben & Jerry's, Cabot Cheese, Shelburne Farms, Grafton Cheese, Vermont Butter and Cheese, the many small artisan cheese makers in the state, and the numerous specialty food producers depend immensely on the Vermont name and thus the Vermont brand. In this time of increased concern over food safety, now is not the time for the Legislature to loosen food safety standards in Vermont that could jeopardize Vermont's good reputation in these and other markets.

Roger Allbee of Townsend is the secretary of the Agency of Agriculture

Marti, let's rightly divide the Word Truth, shall we?

2009-03-24T13:21:00.005-04:00

Marti, I'm promoting your comment to my previous post because it deserves it. Let me make my comments to your comments. I tried to become your friend at Bebo but so far no luck. In all fairness, I did a bit of googling and understand that you are a transgendered person. That would explain the venom in your comments.

Apparently you would like to force your religion on others.

No, not at all. I am simply a follower of Jesus, not attached to the dogma of organized religion. I use the Bible as my "owner's manual", if you will. It contains the truth about living here on earth.

You mock the transgender rights bill without looking at anything underneath it.

I didn't mock you, but I'm not going to look under your skirt, if that is what you are saying.

The FACTS are that a transgender person has NEVER molested or raped anyone in a restroom, and there HAVE been assaults of transgender people in restrooms. Bottom line is that if you want to protect women and children, stop them from going to church. Because there HAVE BEEN rapes and molestations by pastors.

Facts are pretty slippery things, aren't they? That is a pretty broad statement, and when I see the word never I am pretty sure the opposite is going to be the truth. Truth is different than facts.

Yes, there have been abuses by members of the clergy, and by fathers and mothers, brothers and sisters. All are sinners. Every single person on the face of the earth is a sinner.

Seriously, I think you would make Christ vomit. I most certainly think he will say "I never knew thee" to you.

Wow. That's mean. Ouch. Fortunately I don't believe it and it doesn't shake me that you say either of those things.

"Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness."

My friend and I were talking about your comment and she observed how interesting it is which verses from the bible have sunk into people who wouldn't ordinarily use any part of the bible as a guidepost for how to live a righteous life.

Christ's heart was full of compassion and love for sinners of all flavors. He said he came to save, not condemn.

He came for one reason, and one reason only; that is to have people put away their sinful ways and go back to being in right relationship with God, who was really Himself in human form. Yes, that is why God became a human and was killed, crucified so that mankind would return to the right relationship that He desired. Didn't Jesus say to the prostitute, "Go and sin no more"?

He ate with my kind, not yours.

Talk about being judgmental. You have no idea what condition I was in when the Lord called me to himself. No idea what so ever. I was a drug addict, a whore, the lowest of lows. The grace and mercy that the Lord has given me, well, there are no words to help you understand. Best move of my life, though, being saved, born again.

He wasn't smarmy, he didn't take sin and smear it in the face of others. His life was about free will and following God, yet you seem to think you have a better way.

I don't think I have a better way. What I know is what is truth. This is where most people misunderstand what Jesus was about. He was not about free will and following God. He was about getting people back into right relationship with God and that gate is narrow. ^{Matthew 7:13}"Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. ¹⁴But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.

You want to force your way of life on everyone around you. Why is that? You speak of Sodom and Gomorrah, but not Christ's love. Why is that?

But I am talking of Christ's love. He wants everyone on the face of the planet to turn back to God. He stands in between pleading your case, my case, the cases of everyone. We are all sinners...ALL. I speak of Sodom and Gomorrah because the truth is that we are headed there. There was homosexuality there. Gensis 19:3 But he insisted so strongly that they did go with him and entered his house. He prepared a meal for them, baking bread without yeast, and they ate. ⁴ Before they had gone to bed, all the men from every part of the city of Sodom—both young and old—surrounded the house. ⁵ They called to Lot, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them."

Instead of being the Pharisee, maybe you should look in your heart and give YOUR life to Christ instead of trying to banish others to hell, trying to get them to come to Christ in fear, rather than in love.

But I have given my life to Christ. I don't want to banish you to hell but rather have you turn away from sin (any sin, we are all sinners, ALL).

1 John 4:17-19 (New International Version)

¹⁷In this way, love is made complete among us so that we will have confidence on the day of judgment, because in this world we are like him. ¹⁸There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love. ¹⁹We love because he first loved us.

I am interested in you knowing perfect love from God so that you understand that what you felt about yourself, feeling that you were born into the wrong skin or gender, is not the truth.

Christ calls you to love the sinner. Is this post doing that?

My post is about how gay marriage and transexuals ought not to have extra special 'rights' because all rights are endowed by God. Homosexuals and transgenders have all of the same rights as everyone else. It is not for the state to decide to empower you if you cannot empower yourself through the truth. The truth may not feel all squishy and good. The truth may not be to your liking, but the truth is the truth. God does not lie. God cannot see sin.

Please, I don't want to spend eternity with the likes of you in hell.

I am not going to hell. I know where I am spending eternity.

Please repent and follow your God's wishes. Don't make hell worse for us sinners by joining us. I'm sure hell will be full of the self righteous. And for the record, I don't care if you delete this. You read it. Your own heart and scripture will judge you.

I bet by this point in your writing you were just so filled with anger that you had to write all that. You are afraid, aren't you that you will spend eternity separated from God. Right at this very second (the second you read this if you come back to see if I might have replied) you can turn it all around. God will meet you right where you are. All you have to do is ask Him to make your life right. Tell him you know you are a sinner (we are all sinners, ALL) and you want to be restored to him.

Let me leave you with this and then I'll leave the rest to God.

Romans 6:19 (New International Version)

¹⁹I put this in human terms because you are weak in your natural selves. Just as you used to offer the parts of your body in slavery to impurity and to ever-increasing wickedness, so now offer them in slavery to righteousness leading to holiness.

Gay Marriage Passes the Senate in Vermont

2009-03-23T22:08:00.003-04:00

Same-sex marriage vote worries Vt. politicians.

It should!!!!

MONTPELIER — He's a freshman Democrat from a conservative district, forced to take a position he worries could cost him his seat.

She's a former Republican lawmaker who knows too well his dilemma: Nine years ago, she voted "yea" to civil unions, and it cost her her job.

With votes on gay marriage under way at the Statehouse, state Sen. Matthew Choate and former Rep. Marion Milne offer perspectives that illustrate the dilemma confronting 180 Vermont legislators.

Vote "yes" and you're a hero to the gay and lesbian lobby, a pariah to those who believe government shouldn't tamper with a social institution. Vote "no" and you're seen as a bigot by some, a champion by others.

A same-sex marriage bill moved a step closer to becoming law Monday, with the state Senate passing it in a 26-4 vote. The House takes up the issue Tuesday, with a vote scheduled for Friday. Gov. Jim Douglas, who opposes the bill, hasn't said whether he will veto it if the Legislature passes it. [Read the rest here.]

If you give them an inch, they will take a mile. Like this recent article from New Hampshire.

State House Dome: Transgender rights in 'bathroom bill'

REPUBLICANS call it the "bathroom bill."

Democrats call it a non-discrimination bill.

In either case, House Bill 415 is stirring up interest, e-mails and phone calls from as far away as Boston, according to its sponsor, Rep. Ed Butler.

Butler filed the bill to close what he sees as a loophole in state law that allows discrimination against transsexuals. The bill adds to a host of laws -- which bar discrimination on the basis of sex, age, race, creed, color, sexual orientation or religion -- the words "gender identity" or "gender expression." [Read the rest here]

I will actively work towards unseating the Senators who voted Yea on this bill... and there are some in the list that I like. For the record, homosexuality is an abomination to the Lord. No need to argue with me about that. Ask yourself the question; Where will you spend eternity? It is an answer that you need to have before you go another day.

The picture on this post is of Sodom and Gomorrah. That is where we are heading.

Two Open Letters to Chairman David Scott, Subcommittee on Livestock, etc.

2009-03-21T21:47:00.003-04:00

I've been offline for a few days due to a hard spanking by Wildblue for going over our bandwidth. I have to say Thanks to Kevin who works in the escalation office who restored our usage. In the meantime, two open letters about the fake hearing in Congress the other day have been published. I want to make sure that you read them.

First letter by Marti Oakley:

The Honorable David Scott

Chairman, House Committee on Agriculture

Subcommittee on Livestock, Dairy and Poultry

1301 Longworth House Office Building

Washington, D.C. 20515-6001

RE: Testimony for March 11, 2009 Hearing on Review of Animal Identification Systems

Dear Chairman Scott and Subcommittee Members:

I am Marti Oakley, a consumer, writing to ask you to reject the USDA’s attempts to make mandatory the National Animal Identification System and as a companion assault on private property ownership, the Premises ID.

Having witnessed first hand the common contempt displayed by congress, if not outright disregard, when the public attempts to assert their opinions on pending legislative activity, please know that I will post this letter to you in every possible venue. The American public needs to know what is about to happen to independent farmers and ranches if NAIS is made mandatory, or, if any of the fake [food safety] bills are forced into law. They also need to be made aware of the resulting threat to not only food production, but its subsequent reduction in quality that will result.

Experience has taught me that what may appear to be an innocuous change in wording in reality is a change in legal definition and standing within the law. This is how [treaties] are re-designated as [agreements] to side step Constitutional criteria and protections and allowing illegal implementation of agreements usurping US law.

Read the rest here. Link will open a new window.

Second letter by Darol Dickinson:

Wednesday I listened with attentiveness to the “Public Hearing” on NAIS. I respectfully was sickened by the flawed information presented by the USDA to members of the committee. I was equally nauseated by the choice of “briefers” USDA had chosen to inform members of the Senate and Congress about NAIS prior to the hearing. Please share these points with your associates who are considering making a decision on NAIS that will adversely affect livestock producers from the smallest up to the largest operations for the rest of our lives.

1) NAIS proposes 48 hour trace back; it would not change food safety. Every human sickness from meat products is caused by incorrect processing, which are stamped and approved by USDA inspectors. Nothing before slaughter is detrimental to human health. The proposed NAIS ends before slaughter.

2) USDA presented NAIS as an important issue that must be dealt with promptly. That is not true. There is no urgency, no need, no rush and no value.

3) At this time the USA has the most disease free livestock in the world and the safest food. The system used by the once dedicated USDA has and will safely serve the nation. It is not out dated as you were falsely told. US private enterprise herd health is the professional example to the world.

Read the rest here. Link will open a new window.

Please come back here and buy First They Came for the Cows: An Activist's Story. Now more than ever you need to understand the history of NAIS.

Your attention urgently needed

2009-03-14T16:29:00.002-04:00

I just can't bring myself to make comments about the things he says in this particular weekly address. Just read it for yourself, but know, KNOW, that they are coming for YOUR GARDEN, YOUR TABLE. Educate yourself on HR 875 & HR 759.

Remarks of Obama
His Weekly Address
Saturday, March 14, 2009
Washington, DC

I’ve often said that I don’t believe government has the answer to every problem or that it can do all things for all people. We are a nation built on the strength of individual initiative. But there are certain things that we can’t do on our own. There are certain things only a government can do. And one of those things is ensuring that the foods we eat, and the medicines we take, are safe and don’t cause us harm. That is the mission of our Food and Drug Administration and it is a mission shared by our Department of Agriculture, and a variety of other agencies and offices at just about every level of government.

The men and women who inspect our foods and test the safety of our medicines are chemists and physicians, veterinarians and pharmacists. It is because of the work they do each and every day that the United States is one of the safest places in the world to buy groceries at a supermarket or pills at a drugstore. Unlike citizens of so many other countries, Americans can trust that there is a strong system in place to ensure that the medications we give our children will help them get better, not make them sick; and that a family dinner won’t end in a trip to the doctor’s office.

But in recent years, we’ve seen a number of problems with the food making its way to our kitchen tables. In 2006, it was contaminated spinach. In 2008, it was salmonella in peppers and possibly tomatoes. And just this year, bad peanut products led to hundreds of illnesses and cost nine people their lives – a painful reminder of how tragic the consequences can be when food producers act irresponsibly and government is unable to do its job. Worse, these incidents reflect a troubling trend that’s seen the average number of outbreaks from contaminated produce and other foods grow to nearly 350 a year – up from 100 a year in the early 1990s.

Part of the reason is that many of the laws and regulations governing food safety in America have not been updated since they were written in the time of Teddy Roosevelt. It’s also because our system of inspection and enforcement is spread out so widely among so many people that it’s difficult for different parts of our government to share information, work together, and solve problems. And it’s also because the FDA has been underfunded and understaffed in recent years, leaving the agency with the resources to inspect just 7,000 of our 150,000 food processing plants and warehouses each year. That means roughly 95% of them go uninspected.

That is a hazard to public health. It is unacceptable. And it will change under the leadership of Dr. Margaret Hamburg, whom I am appointing today as Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration. From her research on infectious disease at the National Institutes of Health to her work on public health at the Department of Health and Human Services to her leadership on biodefense at the Nuclear Threat Initiative, Dr. Hamburg brings to this vital position not only a reputation of integrity but a record of achievement in making Americans safer and more secure. Dr. Hamburg was one of the youngest people ever elected to the National Academy of Sciences’ Institute of Medicine. And her two children have a unique distinction of their own. Their birth certificates feature her name twice – once as their mother, and once as New York City Health Commissioner. In that role, Dr. Hamburg brought a new life to a demoralized agency, leading an internationally-recognized initiative that cut the tuberculosis rate by nearly half, and overseeing food safety in our nation’s largest city.

Joining her as Principal Deputy Commissioner will be Dr. Joshua Sharfstein. As Baltimore’s Health Commissioner, Dr. Sharfstein has been recognized as a national leader for his efforts to protect children from unsafe over-the-counter cough and cold medications. And he’s designed an award-winning program to ensure that Americans with disabilities had access to prescription drugs.

Their critical work – and the critical work of the FDA they lead – will be part of a larger effort taken up by a new Food Safety Working Group I am creating. This Working Group will bring together cabinet secretaries and senior officials to advise me on how we can upgrade our food safety laws for the 21st century; foster coordination throughout government; and ensure that we are not just designing laws that will keep the American people safe, but enforcing them. And I expect this group to report back to me with recommendations as soon as possible.

As part of our commitment to public health, our Agriculture Department is closing a loophole in the system to ensure that diseased cows don’t find their way into the food supply. And we are also strengthening our food safety system and modernizing our labs with a billion dollar investment, a portion of which will go toward significantly increasing the number of food inspectors, helping ensure that the FDA has the staff and support they need to protect the food we eat.

In the end, food safety is something I take seriously, not just as your President, but as a parent. When I heard peanut products were being contaminated earlier this year, I immediately thought of my 7-year old daughter, Sasha, who has peanut butter sandwiches for lunch probably three times a week. No parent should have to worry that their child is going to get sick from their lunch. Just as no family should have to worry that the medicines they buy will cause them harm. Protecting the safety of our food and drugs is one of the most fundamental responsibilities government has, and, with the outstanding team I am announcing today, it is a responsibility that I intend to uphold in the months and years to come.

Thank you.

House Subcommittee on Livestock Public Hearing

2009-03-11T19:07:00.003-04:00

Follows is from one of our intrepid anti-NAIS fighters, cattle rancher Darol Dickinson. I hope you remembered to listen to the subcommittee's hearing. The deck was stacked. The chairman was hostile. They continue to believe NAIS is about food safety.

House Committee on Agriculture~~Public Hearing.

Darol Dickinson~~reporting

Wednesday, March 11, 2009, Longworth House Office Bldg.
Re: To review animal identification systems

Washington DC---at 10:00 AM the first public hearing was held on USDA's proposed NAIS animal numbering and enforcement plan. Numerous organizations were frustrated that no public forum was provided in the last six years to approach elected officials concerning this polarizing strategy. Livestock producers all over the US were excited about this opportunity to present opposition to NAIS. Recent polls have revealed that over 90% of livestock owners, if given a choice, would not enroll property in NAIS.

For starters, USDA organized the format with eight approved speakers who were required to submit a written text prior to their presentation.

Dr. John Clifford, Deputy Administrator, APHIS was given the floor with unlimited dialog time to explain the imperative nature of NAIS. Committee members not familiar with livestock were provided written questions to ask Clifford. He is an employee of USDA and his job approval has to do with selling NAIS. He alleged the cost of NAIS would be as little as a half cent per cow. He also alleged volunteer NAIS property enrollment was 35% of the US livestock producers and later a different sworn testimony stated sign up was as small at 9% in some states. (Nationally NAIS enrollment is under 10% when accurate numbers are calculated.)

Bill Nutt, of Georgia Cattleman's Assn testified that the current numbering systems used by livestock owners were totally adaquate for all animal ID. NAIS enforements were not necessary. (5 minutes allowed)

Dr. R.M. (Max) Thornsberry DVM, President of R-Calf, written testamony attached. He stated NAIS was not necessary, not wanted by the majority of livestock producers and the proposed plan would not make meat food safer. (allowed 5 minutes)

Three other individuals testified for NAIS who were licensed by USDA, under the authority or had been given grant money by USDA.

Dr. Rob Williams of Australia testified how the Australian animal ID system worked well. He did not state that in Australia livestock breeders dislike the cost of their NLIS system because they can not compete in the world market with countries who don't force a numbering compliance. NLIS is considered by producers in Australia to be detrimental to world competitive trade for Australia. Australia has a 100% numbering scheme and their beef is the second lowest priced on the world market.

Kerry St. Cyr of Canada Cattle Identification Agency is employed by the Canadian numbering scheme and his salary depends on it's continuation. Canada also can compete against US meat products better if US has the cost burden of NAIS.

Today NAIS was judged by our elected leaders. USDA selected their own jury, and determined how many minutes each testified. The testamonies, much like speed dating, gave little time for serious evaluation.

Please see the attached [it is not attached, click here to go to the House Ag Committee's statements webpage - Hen] by Dr. Thornsberry who represented the over 3,000,000 livestock producers who are apalled by the NAIS. This is the R-CALF USA's written and oral testimony's on NAIS which was not allowed enough time to complete. The oral is the shorter version.

Please contact your elected officials to oppose this flawed program.

Listen up! US House Ag Subcommittee on Livestock, Dairy and Poultry

2009-03-10T19:20:00.003-04:00

The NAIS hearing of the U.S. House Agriculture Subcommittee on Livestock Dairy and Poultry on Wednesday March 11, at 10:00 a.m. Eastern time, will have video and audio streaming available at the following link:
http://agriculture.house.gov/hearings/audio.html

PLEASE VIDEO RECORD (download) THIS IF YOU CAN, FOR POSTING TO YOUTUBE AND THE NICFA WEBSITE.

For a list of the witnesses who will testify:
http://agriculture.house.gov/hearings/schedule.html [Dr. Max Thornsberry, R-CALF, is to testify against NAIS - Hen]

Knowing what is said tomorrow at the hearing will help us write meaningful responses to Congressmen.

Please send your download, or a link to YouTube, or wherever you upload it, to info@nicfa.org.

Yours for food freedom,

Deborah Stockton, Executive Director
National Independent Consumers and Farmers Association (NICFA)
nicfa@earthlink.net

Our purpose is to promote and preserve unregulated direct farmer-to-consumer trade that fosters availability of locally grown or home-produced food products.
NICFA opposes any government funded or managed National Animal Identification System.

Truth For Tuesday with Doreen Hannes

2009-03-09T16:36:00.003-04:00

This week Truth Farmer will feature guest, activist and author extraordinaire, Sharon Zechinelli. Sharon has been fighting against the National Animal Identification System for years. Sharon has written a book entitled "First They Came for the Cows" which is available through her directly at henwhisperer@gmail.com, or through Amazon.com chronicling the events and discoveries made by "Maddie" as she unwound the web of deceit used to foist this program upon the public.

Sharon and Doreen have appeared together on a few radio shows and Cattlenetwork.com "Five Minutes with Jolley". Sharon has a wealth of information to share and is an engaging and dynamic guest. Join us at 1pm EST on Tuesday March 10th for another informative show on the NAIS and life in the sights of the opponents of freedom.

Click on the links below to hear Truth Farmer on Tuesday from 1pm EST to 3pm EST:

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/Sentinel_Radio/2009/03/03/Truth-Farmer-with-Doreen

http://www.tsrn.us/blog/show-schedule/

NAIS White Paper

2009-03-07T21:04:00.004-05:00

The National Independent Consumers and Farmers Association (NICFA) has just released a Report (White Paper) on the National Animal Identification System to go to all members of Congress, the general public, and all interested parties.

Please read and download the Report at http://nicfa.com/documents.html

Please call your Congressman and Senators (find them at www.House.gov and www.senate.gov respectively). Ask to speak to their Aide for agricultural issues. Talk to the aide about NAIS and ask to fax or email him the Report.

We want every member of Congress to receive this Report from a constituent.

If you'd like to get a full understanding of how USDA got the foothold they have, read my book, First They Came for the Cows: An Activist's Story. Click through the link on the right side bar.

I'll be on a radio show with my good friend and fellow freedom fighter, Doreen Hannes, on Tuesday next. For the particulars click over to her blog, Truth-Farmer.blogspot.com.

Welcome Facebook blog followers!

2009-03-06T07:09:00.004-05:00

Facebook is rather interesting. I've not been a fan of social networking sites because they tend, imo, to be overrun by ultra-liberal college kids without a clue as to why they are ultra-liberal. But I'm liking Facebook because the ultra-liberal stuff isn't in my face all the time, I'd have to go looking for it.

MSNBC did an article recently that said, "The fastest-growing crowd on Facebook is a new one, women over 55." Raises hand. That would be me. Grin.

I haven't figured out how to promote my blog on Facebook, but I can see the potential to reach millions of consumers to warn and educate about NAIS and the other bills before Congress to control every aspect of the food supply.

I'll be posting tomorrow, or maybe later today, a series of emails coming in from around the country about how ordinary people are being set up and shot down when they try to influence state legislators. We need to remember who these state legislators are when elections come around again and kick them out of office.

And there is news from Wisconsin where farmers are being notified that if they do not re-register their premises they will face fines of $5,000. All this while it was discovered that the premises registration database for Wisconsin is housed in....wait for it....

Canada!!

Please, buy my book. Click through the link on the right side bar. First They Came for the Cows will help you understand how NAIS got to where it is and it will help consumers understand what NAIS means to them.

Get your Truth for Tuesday

2009-03-02T17:18:00.007-05:00

Get your Truth for Tuesday on Sentinel Radio

Join Truth Farmer host Doreen Hannes and guest Bob Parker on Tuesday, March 3rd, 2009 at 1:00 p.m. EST for a 2 hour program discussing the problems with organizations that purport to represent farmers and the direction that farming is headed in this country.

Doreen Hannes is a freedom-loving researcher and homesteader who has been putting the pieces of the puzzle together on what is eating up our freedom and future for several years. She is an active and respected authority on the National Animal Identification System and the global issues behind its implementation.

Bob Parker is a former dairy farmer and cattle grower who has been involved with farming all of his life. Bob and Doreen met in the fight against the National Animal Identification System and spearheaded the resistance in Missouri. Please call in!

Call-in Number: (646) 727-2652

Direct link to the show

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/Sentinel_Radio/2009/03/03/Truth-Farmer-with-Doreen

Snake in the grass

2009-03-01T20:22:00.004-05:00

One of the most disturbing things that I've learned since becoming a grass-roots activist is that even though some coalitions, alliances, and organizations appear to be on 'our side', in truth they are not. Something must happen to these people. I have no doubt that when they begin working for a common goal they have good intentions, same goes for the newly elected in Washington. Maybe it is the ego stroking, maybe it is the potential to make money, but somewhere along the line they become a snake in the grass.

I just want to say that before you decide to donate money to an activist group, check them out first and ask yourself if they are in it for the cause or are they in it for the money? Research their political donations even. Here is one example.

Just saying, and I visited this topic before, know who is on your side and know who is part of the controlled opposition.

The Lord said it best;
King James Bible
Matthew 10
16 Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.
17 But beware of men: for they will deliver you up to the councils, and they will scourge you in their synagogues;

This is where the rubber meets the road

2009-02-27T09:12:00.008-05:00

If you are like me, a homesteader growing a few animals for personal use - eggs, meat birds, pigs, turkeys and a horse - you might not have given any thought to the Omnibus Spending Spree, er, Bill and if it might affect your right to own animals. Surprise! It will. Read on.

Links:

Http://www.rules.house.gov/111/LegText/111_omni2009.htm See: "Division A"

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c111:2:./temp/~c111zkqFeo:: (HR 1105 - Text - make sure the " :: " is in the address bar)

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?r111:@OR+(+@1(H.R.+1105)++@1(H.+R.+1105)++) (Congressional Record entries - be sure the "++)" is included in the address bar)

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c111:1:./temp/~c1119xtt9W:: (H Res 184, related legislation - be sure " :: " is in there)

Excerpt:

The bill includes $129,180,000 for Animal Health Monitoring and surveillance, including $14,500,000, an increase of $4,713,000, for the National Animal Identification System (NAIS). Given this investment, coupled with the almost $128,000,000 that Congress has already provided for NAIS, APHIS is expected to make demonstrable progress with effectively implementing the animal identification system. Accordingly, APHIS is directed to meet the following species traceability objectives that are derived from the agency's final 2008 animal disease traceability business plan:

--Cattle: By March 1,2009, identify 30 percent of the nation's cattle population to premises of origin within 48 hours of a disease event.

--Goats: By October 1,2009, identify 90 percent of goat breeding herds to their birth premises within 48 hours of a disease event.

--Poultry: By July 1,2009, achieve 98 percent traceability in the commercial poultry industry through the identification of commercial production units in the required radius within 48 hours of a disease event.

--Sheep: By October 1, 2009, identify 90 percent of sheep breeding flock to their birth premises within 48 hours of a disease event.

--Swine: By February 1, 2009, achieve 80 percent traceability in the commercial swine industries through the identification of commercial production units in the required radius within 48 hours of a disease event.

In addition, APHIS is directed to meet the following program administration milestones that are similarly derived from the final 2008 animal disease traceability business plan:

--By February 1, 2009: Publish proposed rulemaking to consider establishing the seven-character PIN as the national location identifier standard and establish the "840" Animal Identification Number as the Single version for the numbering system.

--By February 1, 2009: Incorporate the NAIS-compliant premises identification number format into existing Federal disease program activities.

--By May 1, 2009: Publish proposed rulemaking to consider using a premises identification number, in the NAIS-compliant format, for import/export facilities, the destination of imported livestock and the Location of exported animals prior to the assembly.

There is concern that APHIS removed a key outcome milestone from its final animal disease traceability business plan that assessed the agency's progress on integrating tracking databases maintained by States and private organizations. APHIS is directed to submit a report to the Committees that explains why the agency dropped this important milestone from its final business plan. APHIS is further directed to
provide an update on its current progress with fully integrating the Animal Trace Processing System with non-Federal tracking databases.

APHIS is directed to submit a report to the Committees within one week after each of the milestone dates outlining the status of each species traceability objective and program administration milestone and the reason the deadline was not met.

--------------
Find your Senator here and call his/her office. Ask for the Ag Policy Advisor and have a converstation with that person. Make nice, but be firm.

This is where the rubber meets the road. Act now, today, right this minute.

The House managed to pass this “Omnibus 2009” in 24 hours and we have no

reason to believe that the Senate will not as well.

What are you going to do? We as living human beings do not go to the polls to elect officials to represent Multi-National Corporations or Lobbyists paid by groups attempting to get their piece of the pie.

THE LARGEST UNPAID LOBBY GROUP IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IS SITTING IN THAT CHAIR IN FRONT OF THE KEYBOARD – YOU ARE IT.

Buy my book and send it to the Ag Policy Advisor that you are going to get to know today. What better way to educate someone about NAIS. Click through the link on the right side bar.

Swallow Peanuts but Choke on Raw Milk - Excellent Article

2009-02-22T19:44:00.004-05:00

Tim Rowland

Swallow peanuts, but choke on raw milk?

February 22, 2009

It's rich to hear state health departments and the federal Food and Drug Administration shake a warning finger at the Maryland General Assembly over the dangers of raw milk.

It is equally quaint to hear the farm bureaus raise the same complaints, considering that many of their dairy-farmer members grew up drinking the stuff.

The message is that any milk that hasn't been cooked beyond recognition under the watchful eye of government regulators is unfit for human consumption - and as regulators guard the front door with shotguns to prevent a dairy breaking and entering, tons of bacterially poisoned peanut butter are slipping in through the back, which should be proof enough that it's the producer, not the product, that makes the difference. [read the rest here]

But before you go....buy my book. Or look at it anyway. Click through on the right sidebar. It is an excellent resource for people who don't know about NAIS, and, if I might say so, a very good read. Signed copies still available, drop me an email.

A Blog Award! They like me, they really, really like me

2009-02-19T21:30:00.002-05:00

My friend on American Way Farm gave me an "Excellence in Blogcasting Award" and now I am to pass it on.

My list:

#1 Queenacres Homestead - Susan has an awesome poultry group on Yahoo and she is a sister in the Lord.

#2 Home-Steeped Hope - For the recipes, info about Amish Friendship Bread, common sense remedies, and oh! Mary is a sister in the Lord.

#3 Maine Momma - my daughter-in-law, photographer of excellent natural talent. You should look at what she does. She has a Flickr thing going on also and sells photos.

Before you go, please take a moment to click through any of the links to see my book. It is selling very well, but more people should be reading it to understand about NAIS. If you'd like a personalized copy, drop me an email. henwhisperer @ gmail . com (remove the extra spaces).

2009-02-16T08:38:00.002-05:00

Now you can Look Inside the Book! Click through and read some my novel, First They Came for the Cows: An Activist's Story. I am told by those who have read it that it should be used as a resource for educating consumers about what NAIS means.

Go see for yourself. :-)

They say 'traceability' like it is something achievable

2009-02-15T16:57:00.002-05:00

By Marti Oakley

To amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, the Federal Meat Inspection Act, the Poultry Products Inspection Act, and the Egg Products Inspection Act to improve the safety of food, meat, and poultry products through enhanced traceability, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

February 3, 2009

Ms. DEGETTE (for herself, Ms. BORDALLO, Mr. NADLER of New York, and Ms. DELAURO) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Agriculture, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

H.R. 814 called the [Tracing and Recalling Agricultural Contamination Everywhere Act of 2009] or, [The Trace Act of 2009] is nothing less than the federal intent to mandate the National Animal Identification System (NAIS) and of course “and for other purposes”.

SEC. 26. TRACEABILITY OF LIVESTOCK, MEAT, AND MEAT PRODUCTS.

(a) Definition of Traceability- In this section, the term ‘traceability’ means the ability to retrieve the history, use, and location of an article through a recordkeeping and audit system or registered identification.

(b) Requirements-

(1) IN GENERAL- Cattle, sheep, swine, goats, and horses, mules, and other equines presented for slaughter for human food purposes, and the carcasses or parts of carcasses and the meat and meat food products of those animals, shipped in interstate commerce shall be identified in a manner that enables the Secretary to trace-

(A) each animal to any premises or other location at which the animal was held at any time before slaughter; and

(B) each carcass or part of a carcass and meat and meat food product of such animals forward from slaughter through processing and distribution to the ultimate consumer.

(2) TRACEABILITY SYSTEM- Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this section, the Secretary shall establish a traceability system for all stages of production, processing, and distribution of meat and meat food products that are produced through the slaughter of animals described in paragraph (1).

(c) Prohibition or Restriction on Entry- The Secretary may prohibit or restrict entry into any slaughtering establishment inspected under this Act of any cattle, sheep, swine, goats, or horses, mules, or other equines not identified as prescribed by the Secretary under subsection (b).

Apparently USDA was inefficient in its efforts to forcibly overtake the US food supplies and the federal government has found it necessary to intervene and make mandatory the implementation of NAIS on all levels.

SEC. 26. TRACEABILITY OF LIVESTOCK, MEAT, AND MEAT PRODUCTS.

(g) Relation to Country of Origin Labeling- Nothing contained in this section prevents or interferes with implementation of the country of origin labeling requirements of subtitle D of the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 (7 U.S.C. 1638 et seq.).’.

Isn’t this section a hoot! No mention is made of the labeling law passed in 2005 requiring the country of origin to be listed on the label of foods, or, the listing of cloned, genetically altered or mutated foods. A law which this same government has refused to enforce in deference to corporate donors who know the garbage they are packaging and selling isn’t fit for human consumption.

H.R. 814 is clearly nothing less than the federal legislation converting NAIS from a bad a idea to horrendous plan for seizing food production from any source in the US and handing it over to Frankenfood industrialized factory farms on behalf of the bio-pirates who have apparently bought and paid for this legislation.

Ms. Degette, Ms. Bordallo, and Mr. Nadler should all be removed from office. In fact anyone supporting or voting to pass this latest piece of anti-American garbage should be run out of the country.

When will we stop abiding traitors, corporate whores and world government advocates in the government of the sovereign United States? Our House and Senate on both sides are filled with individuals who have neither patriotism nor loyalty to this country and who work to dismantle our Republic, our freedom and our way of life.

The three “public servants” sponsoring this bill are just a small trio in what has become the wholesale destruction of our nation perpetrated by one corrupted congress after another.

What will it take for the American public to stand up and say “enough!”.

http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/111_HR_814.html

NAIS - Congress Briefings Askew by USDA

2009-02-14T17:35:00.004-05:00

NAIS~~~ Congress Briefings Askew by USDA

By Darol Dickinson

There is ocean front property in Arizona, you can have it free, but at some future date you may have to pay some amount of property tax and other ownership assessments may be enforced from time to time. Does this sound like an illusionary Bernie Madoff investment?

In a letter dated July 20, 2008, Jere L. Dick of USDA--APHIS wrote, "According to USDA’s National Agricultural Statistics Service, there are 1.4 million US livestock raising operations that derive at least $1000 annual revenue from livestock sales. More than 475,532 premises, approximately 33% of this total figure---had been registered with NAIS."

USDA has had a long respected history of integrity, honest calculations and trusted service to all livestock owners. Now, to implement their NAIS program all the ethics have been truncated. Many who recall the USDA uprightness of record, are now appalled at the extraordinary degree of political deviousness USDA uses to promote their esteemed 100% computerized animal numbering program---NAIS.

The 2007 US Ag Census was released Feb. 4. Although the product and type operation of a ranch, dairy or grain farm is totally different, USDA calls them all the same generic name, "farms." Census data shows the USA is home to 96,347,858 cattle with 963,669 cattle farms. There are 9.3 million sheep and 83,134 sheep farms. There are 3,140,529 goats and 144,466 goat farms. There are 67,786,318 hogs at 75,442 hog farms. There are 296 million turkeys, 349 million laying hens, and 2,187,509,325 total domestic fowl at 213,432 farms, assuming the census process carefully counted them all.

For horse population, Kathie Luedeke at the American Horse Council in Washington DC stated there are 1.96 million people who own 9.2 million horses in the US, a number no one disputes.

For totals, this comes to 2,373,284,030 head of livestock, fowl, etc. They reside at 3,410,142 US farms. NAIS enforcement plans also include not just the above numbers, but a total of 33 different species [including] cervidae, buffalo, camelids, alpaca, deer, ratites, marsupials, elk, etc. Obviously the 2.3 billion number is just a start in the scheme as no census numbers are available on the huge domestic game bird business. An unknown total non-census number is much farther beyond published Feb. 4 data.

For the Ag census, only US farms with sales of $1000 or more annually are counted. Reliable sources estimate there are 411,400* farms with less than $1000 annual sales, who would be required to comply with mandatory NAIS. This could include inventory of small animals, 4-H projects, fancy poultry, hobbyist, entry level and want-to-be farmers.

The largest expansion category for the 2007 census was cattle owners of 1 to 9 head up from 179,346 in the 2002 census to 232,849 farms. Small farms are growing in numbers faster than all other sizes. Much of this is due to subdivision of land holdings mostly near cities. This additionally increases numbers of owners of smaller inventory groups.

NAIS premises enrollment encourages more than one premises sign up per farm owner. This is designed to multiply current enrollments for USDA and increase annual licenses fees once the program is mandatory. Owners of a diversified operation could spread their risk of a forced livestock "depopulation" if USDA suspected a disease. Owned or leased farms could be divided into a number of different units. If NAIS becomes mandatory one concerned rancher plans to enroll 18 farm units to protect family livestock assets from a complete business devastation in case of a USDA inflicted quarantine or depopulation.

The USDA official press releases and staff tells Congress, the media, the Senate, and the public, a number of 1.4 million livestock raising operations exist in the US. Yet, the 2007 US Ag census, plus the American Horse Council data and farms with below $1000 in annual sales clearly reveal the more correct number is at least 3,821,542 farms raising livestock.

Today the USDA alleges over 500,000 premises are NAIS enrolled. Many of these are multiple unit enrollments, livestock auction facilities who own no cattle, custom feed lots, rodeo arenas, USDA employees, state DOA extension agents, livestock owners who are unaware they are enrolled and producers who are in the process of "Opt Out." Some youth have been forced to "enroll their property" before a single goat or lamb could qualify for government controlled state fair competition.

Western Horseman Magazine is the largest circulation of any livestock publication in the world. In their online poll, June of 2008, it was tabulated with thousands of votes; over 91% of animal owners, if given a choice, would refuse to comply with any component of NAIS.

Calculating the actual number of all real farms, total NAIS alleged enrollments minus the multiple enrollments and adding the under $1000 income farms, the percentage of enrolled farm owners in the US is not 33%, but in fact less than 9.8%.

The USDA has doled out over $138,000,000.00 all authorized by Congress, for cooperative agreements and sign up incentive NAIS programs. Their 28 USDA branches including the Farm Service Agency, County Extension offices and USDA licensed professionals have dedicated untold multiple hours to coerce new enrollments in NAIS. The cost to USDA per NAIS enrolled farm owner is well over $360 each.

NAIS is the result of looking for trouble, not finding it anywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying costly bogus remedies. Never has such a USDA grandiose plot been attempted with less user approval, less convincing value, and such distorted numbers used to spin the program.

During the Houston Stock Show, USDA Deputy Enforcements Secretary, Bruce Knight spoke, trying to cajole Texans (Texas is one of the lowest percentage premises enrolled states) on NAIS said, "Registering is easy. It’s free."

Hello "Bruce" Madoff? Any ocean front property in Arizona available, perhaps 1.4 acres?

For more information on NAIS go to www.naisSTINKS.com.

* Twenty one formal requests to Congressmen, the Sec of Agriculture and USDA staff; all refused to answer in a 60 day period.

First They Came for the Cows is available on Amazon.com

2009-02-14T13:50:00.000-05:00

It's very exciting. Locate the Amazon box on the right sidebar and click through it.

Perhaps you'd like to preview First They Came for the Cows. You can read two excerpts, one here and one here.

Want a signed copy? I've got those, so let me know.

Some churches are using First They Came for the Cows for their book clubs. Good Christian fiction can be hard to come by, you know?

Upcoming events:

There will be a book signing at L.A.C.E. in Barre, Vermont in February, but date still TBA.

Dung beetles

2009-02-12T11:42:00.004-05:00

Do you know what a dung beetle is?

Here is a clue: A dung beetle, with a shovel-like head, rolls a dung ball with its hind legs. Most dung beetles search for dung with the aid of their strong sense of smell. Some of the smaller species, however, simply attach themselves to the dung-providers to wait for their reward. After capturing the dung, a dung beetle will roll it, following a straight line despite all obstacles. Sometimes dung beetles will try to steal the dung ball of another beetle, so the dung beetles have to move rapidly away from a dung pile once they have rolled their ball to prevent it from being stolen.

The answer to the question is this: anyone in Congress.

This rant has to do with 2 new bill being introduced in Congress right now that create a backdoor NAIS. These 2 bills are HR 814 and HR 875. Click through to NoNAIS.org to read about it.

Oh, but before you go.... order my book. If you have had trouble getting people fired up about NAIS, First They Came for the Cows is the thing to have them read. As one person who posted a review on Amazon said, "This book should be in the foyer of every church..." Click through the link on the right sidebar. Thanks!

Sent to the White House

2009-02-06T19:39:00.004-05:00

National Animal Identification System, (NAIS) that thousands of livestock producers have opposed for close to a half dozen years, is still being demanded by USDA, and USDA branches. Like a creeping fungal spore it moves on with unrestrained funding. Why does this numbering plot have a life without death? No economic facts, no logic, no legal barrier stops this horrid scheme as it moves with perverted "cooperative agreements" to number all farm livestock and farm properties.

Nearly 2000 years ago it was written in the Holy Bible that in the last years of history a numbering system would be used so that no person could buy or sell without an enforced number. Real ID and NAIS perfectly fit the prophecy of Revelation 13. It is a battle of the unjust against the just. Some would say it is only a coincidence, yet others are certain a massive plan is in play to number all livestock and then number all people. A federal plan to control people like herds of cattle moving through the check out counter of life.

It is easy to oppose NAIS on purely non-Biblical reasons, but equally easy to see the handwriting on the wall. Every livestock owner should oppose NAIS. Every Christian should oppose NAIS. Every human who consumes food should oppose NAIS. Every USDA employee should oppose NAIS. Every veterinarian, every President, every Congressman and every Senator should oppose NAIS.

Posters of the graphic can be printed from www.naisStinks.com. The link for other posters is http://www.naissucks.com/index.php?con=flyers. Thank you for opposing NAIS and the distribution of information.

Brad Headtel, www.naisSTINKS.com.

Hopefully, that fired you up. Now go here to make your comment about the new numbering system. The cutoff for comments is in March. There are some incredible comments, as well as some questions that USDA must answer before they can go forward. Well, that's the law anyway. We know USDA will do what they want, skew the results they way they want, all that. If there ever was an unlawful agency, USDA is it.

But before you go, order a copy of my book, First They Came for the Cows: An Activist's Story. Look at the right sidebar and click through the Amazon link. This novel is a great way to help people understand what NAIS means for ordinary people.

New Hampshire Scores A Big Win!

2009-01-28T11:35:00.007-05:00

State rep holds her horse bill
Sponsor changes course on $25 fee for licensing

By Margot Sanger-Katz
Monitor staff
January 28, 2009 - 12:00 am

Facing a flurry of opposition to her proposal to require licensing of horses, Rep. Carla Skinder rescinded her support for the bill yesterday, according to people who saw her speak.

Skinder's bill, which was discussed at the House Local and Regulated Revenues Committee yesterday, called for a $25 licensing fee for each horse in the state along with proof that the animal had been vaccinated for rabies. Skinder, a Democrat from Cornish, said Monday that the bill was designed to improve the health of the state's horses and to give some money to towns and the state that might help protect equine health.

But the bill met with sharp opposition from organized horse groups, many of whom wrote letters, sent e-mails and placed phone calls to legislators. Organizers said Monday that more than 100 people would attend yesterday's meeting, but Skinder put out an e-mail at 6:30 yesterday morning forecasting her reversal so angry horse owners would not have to make the trip to Concord. [read the rest here]

So, that means, we, The People, can make a difference. We just need to be more vocal than we have been. Having said that, have YOU made your comments on Regulations.gov about the Official Animal Identificaction Numbering Systems that USDA is trying to implement? Very important that there are more than 50 comments. The comment period ends March 15th.

Before you click away, please, buy my book. It is called First They Came for the Cows - An Activist's Story. It is a fictionalized account about the fight against NAIS. Some of it is true, names changed, of course, and some is fully fiction. It is Christian fiction, and you know how hard good Christian fiction is to come by. Here is the link to my e-store. Eventually it will be available on Amazon, but I don't know when. If you'd like to read a preview, select the nanowritmo link to previous posts. If you'd like to buy copies for resale, let me know. Some church groups are using it for book clubs.

Get fired up! Watch this!

2009-01-26T13:40:00.004-05:00

So Much for Live Free New Hampshire

2009-01-25T07:26:00.005-05:00

Mandatory Equine Licenses Enacted

by Darol Dickinson~~ 1-26-09

The New Hampshire Municipal Association proudly touts a new special "equine" tax that will increase jobs and create new state income from the estimated 24,000 equine in New Hampshire. A licensing of each and every equine is proposed to be effective July 1, 2009. This is a tax of $25 per horse (equine) and in cases of refusal to comply, the state adds another $50 to slap the cowboys in line. It isn't a smoke screen about export, food safety or disease, it is just a new state income.

Beyond the state lines of New Hampshire, the USDA has been at war with livestock owners to coerce enrollment in the National Animal Identification System (NAIS), a multi-billion dollar scheme to computerize, number and create a permanent surveillance system on all US livestock. This plot is the mother of all numbering scenarios. With the commerce of all US livestock, at the end of three years the total computer movements recorded, and paid for by animal owners, would eclipse the number of the earth's human population.

These draconian sounding tax collection schemes, although totally putrid to animal lovers, are completely sane to bureau-rats who's salary increases, retirement and weekly sustenance depend on innovative ways to transfer wealth from the regulated to the regulators.

Just down the trail to New York 88 new taxes have been deviously hatched by the lowly staff of Governor David Paterson to help pay for his flawed $15.4 billion budget gap. Hookers who have enjoyed a tax break on work clothes worth less than $110, won't any more. An 18% increase on sodas is proposed; higher gas tax, increased taxi tax, boats, cars, rental car taxes, cigars, iPods, etc. Plush governmental cubicles high in the New York sky are filled with think-tank devious minds searching the alleys for a new tax source to increase the regulator's revenue. New York Conservative Party Chairman, Michael Long says, "You're (Gov. Paterson) sending notice to the people of New York that we really don't want you here."

Tribute ideas like the USDA's NAIS, horse licensing and the New York taxationists search the world over to locate new and innovative collection methods. It is one thing to develop a new tax and another to collect it. That is where enforcements are enacted with fines, late penalties, and refusal-to-comply fees.

In Australia a tax called the National Livestock Identification System (NLIS) has been operational for several years. Herds of computer toting Biosecurity Officers now stalk the Outback to locate animal owners out of compliance; conviction is up to a $4000 fine for not registering a livestock premises.

The love of companion animals is multiplying in affection world wide. What a sadistic way to create funding, to assess a new tribute for pets, livestock and beloved family animals. Animal licensing is the contemporary government way to tax not just the animal, but the joy and profit of livestock ownership.

In New Hampshire it starts out,

In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Nine, and then explains for Equine Licenses. Amend RSA 435, Sec 41, etc. In a scoop shovel it is proposed, $25 per year, every year, and each animal must have a number. The number process approved by the USDA is a computer chip, surgically injected under the skin by a USDA licensed veterinarian at a fee of $75 to $125 per equine, depending on how many in the remuda.
The Fiscal Impact: "The Department of Agriculture, Markets, and Food and the New Hampshire Municipal Association estimates this bill will increase state and local revenue, and increase local expenditures by an indeterminable amount in FY 2010 and each year thereafter. There will be no fiscal impact on county revenue or state and county expenditures."

On July 1, will the horse owners of New Hampshire migrate to other states or will a large population of equine feces machines establish residence on the Concord State Capitol lawn?

This may be the time and place to rethink the New Hampshire motto: "LIVE FREE OR DIE."

First Australia, the NAIS, the New Hampshire Equine Licenses----all innovations of hostage taxation, which is a spreading livestock disease in itself. The mystery of expanding government is not how it works, but how in the world to make it stop!

More info

www.naisSTINKS.com, Australian Biosecurity, www.dpi.qld.gov.au.

More info on the proposed Equine license law in NH:

HB 427 would require all owners of equines older than 4 months to annually license their animals with the town/city clerk for $25 upon proof that the animal had been vaccinated for rabies. The hearing is set for Tuesday, January 27 th at 1:45 pm before the House Local and Regulated Revenues Committee in Room 303 of the Legislative Office Building

I hope the public descends on that hearing like a plague of locusts!

Welcome Community Spin Listeners

2009-01-24T12:49:00.003-05:00

The links mentioned on Al Huey's show are here:

Nonais.org
NAIS Info Central

Please, get yourself a cuppa and take some time to read through my blog.

Thanks for dropping by.

Honest to God, who is in control in the government?

2009-01-16T19:01:00.005-05:00

There are a ton of things going on right now. Is the old administration running like mad to dump a bunch of programs and rules in the road so that the new administration can inherit this stuff and deny they had anything to do with it?

The first thing I should mention is this. NoNAIS has the full article here.

From Mary Zanoni:

On Tuesday, January 13, 2009, the USDA published in the Federal Register a proposed rule that would make two elements of NAIS — NAIS Premises ID and NAIS individual animal ID — effectively mandatory in several USDA animal disease programs.

This rule, if it goes into effect, would be an enormous step toward creating a fully mandatory NAIS for all U.S. livestock.

The proposed rule directly affects cattle, bison, sheep, goats, and swine. However, it will also bring a full NAIS closer for all species. Therefore, all owners of horses, poultry, and other species should also submit comments and urge their livestock/farming organizations to submit comments. [read the rest of it at NoNAIS. Use the link above. - Hen]

Next to tell you about is this smart decision by Homeland Security and USDA to move Plum Island Animal Disease Center, which is off Long Island, NY, way out in the water, off the mainland, to Manhattan, Kansas, in the middle of cow country. Is there anyone who can't see that this is an - ahem - 'accident' waiting to happen? I am so sorry for our country. It is being led by mad men. It probably has been this way for some long while, but I was not engaged in politics when Bush came to power the first time.

Please don't forget to read a preview of my upcoming novel, First They Came for the Cows. I am still taking pre-orders for this, the first novel written about NAIS.

Lastly, pray to God that he moves to protect us.

Big Problem with Farm to Consumer Legal Defense Fund

2009-01-13T09:06:00.008-05:00

Oh boy. We have pinned some hopes on the FTCLDF to stop NAIS, but now they have messed up again and in a huge way. Follows is what I understand the situation is.

#1: FTCLDF said they filed the suit against the USDA, when they actually hadn't filed it but rather simply mailed it without having an attorney admitted to the bar in the district, District of Columbia, in which they were filing. They made a big press release and request for donations, and then went about getting their ducks in a row so they could actually file the suit. That resulted in about two months delay in getting the suit filed.

#2: When the expected motion for dismissal was sent by the USDA, they requested an extension for filing, including the date they wanted to have to file response against the motion to dismiss. They requested January 2nd, and were awarded that date. However, somehow, they totally blanked on it, and then on January 10th, effectively told the court that the 'dog ate their homework' and they misread the date as January 12th, so they would like it very much if the court would
allow them to amend their original suit so that they can continue against the USDA and Michigan Dept of Agriculture.

I am not an attorney and I do not know anything about legal procedure. That's WHY anyone hires an attorney in the first place. If it were simply a matter of standing up and arguing your case, there would be little to no need for attorneys at all. Procedure and filings are what they are supposed to know and why they can put the title 'esquire' behind their names. I do know that when you cite a date for an extension of time and are granted it, you look pretty stupid for missing it.

So we are still in the very early stages of this suit, and the FTCLDF has screwed it up tremendously on basic procedure. Right now it is entirely up to the judge if she allows them to file the motion to amend the suit. It could be a done deal and need to start over from square one because of all the screw ups.

Basically, they are throwing up a Hail Mary pass and hoping the judge will let them proceed to amend the original suit.

Also, it doesn't look very good to amend the suit after the first motion to dismiss. It's like when you are playing chess and see that your first move put you in immediate jeopardy of getting in check.

The bottom line is this; FTCLDF has made two mistakes and they both make us, the anti-NAIS folks, look like total blooming idiots. The first impressions having to do with the competence of the lawyers will stick in the judge's mind. Procedural errors so early on in the process make us look like what they described us in the NAIS How-To Handbook, as having no more than a 6th grade education.

If you'd like to see pdf copies of the documents that have to do with the suit, the extension request, or more aptly, the excuse, let me know.

Don't forget to read an excerpt from my novel, First They Came for the Cows. I am taking pre-orders for signed copies.

Now taking pre-orders for First They Came for the Cows

2009-01-09T14:08:00.007-05:00

The response to the announcement that First They Came for the Cows will be available for purchase in the next few weeks has been humbling. I am now offering pre-orders for signed books. The price is $19.99 which includes shipping for signed copies. Use the Paypal button below. You do not need a Paypal account to complete the transaction.

Please note: If you think the book would be helpful to your church or organization to use as a fund raiser, please contact me using the comment form below. I will offer multiple books at a lower rate.

You can view another preview of the book here.

First They Came for the Cows

2009-01-04T20:28:00.004-05:00

In 2007 I participated in National Novel Writing Month (NaNoWriMo), and won by writing 50,000 words in that month of November. A book was born! First They Came for the Cows is a fictionalized account of the fight against NAIS, and the first novel about NAIS.

I invite you to the first preview of the book, which will be published and available on Amazon sometime this month.

You'll need a PDF reader.

https://www.createspace.com/Preview/1052903

Please feel free to use the reviewing features. I hope you will because I'd like the feedback.

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

2008-12-29T20:16:00.004-05:00

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

2008-12-27T09:32:00.004-05:00

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

2008-12-22T12:09:00.003-05:00

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

2008-12-18T17:03:00.003-05:00

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?

2008-12-16T09:21:00.004-05:00

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.