Monday, December 14, 2009

Double Think on Disease-

From my good friend Darol Dickinson, on "food safety", and the like....

"Our federal protectors worry about our food safety, ID tracing, inspections, and enforcements. However, interestingly enough, over 20 million large game animals will be bullet riddled this year, field dressed, some packed horseback many miles, some slid on the ground by hand, through water, mud, dust and dirt. None will have ID tracing. Some will be hauled by boat, truck, or plane. Consumable venison will be transported in hot air, rain, snow, dust, and heavy carbon emissions. This food product will be cut and stored by amateurs, paid processors and consumed by families and around camp fires. Not one case of E.coli, food poisoning or major sickness will be reported or considered.

Yet, professional USDA inspected meat product is sickening thousands of people. Can it be the result of vast billions the governments receive from hunting licenses? And almost equal, confiscations and enforcements from laws broken during hunting?

Numerous diseases of concern are rampant in wild game herds. However, these diseases do NOT cause human health issues of any concern to the feds. Hunting season goes on. Do our governments have numerous different standards?"

Now we really don't want to give them any ideas, but sheesh, if they would even try to control brucellosis in the elk, deer and bison hers in the Yellowstone area, we could feel a little more magnanimous towards them...maybe.

Tuesday, December 8, 2009

And Now, for my next guest---Richard Boyden!

I encourage you to go to the original article house at Black Hills Portal, and click through links if you haven't already read them. The gentleman who authored the following article,Richard Boyden,(this article is a masterpiece indictment of the bureaucratic foolishness surrounding raw milk) will be my guest on this week's Truth Farmer radio show at He is an absolute wealth of information! I am very much looking forward to the show.

For those who might wish to know, I am supposed to be on Derry Brownfield on Thursday. The show is going to be on the smoke and mirrors NAIS implementation...and who knows what else!

Please read, this will be good for your health!

Headline News

South Dakota Raw Milk Producers vs Big Government

State of South Dakota Initiates "Pogrom" Of Economic Genocide Against Small Farm Raw Milk Producers

By Richard Boyden

Small farm raw milk producers are being targeted by the state of South Dakota for criminal prosecution, incarceration, and destruction of their businesses if they do not cease to produce and market raw milk according to the “new rule” proposals being presented for implementation by the Dairy Division of the State of South Dakota. What is shared below is a short overview the oppressive format the state of South Dakota is preparing for small farm raw milk producers.

I decided to write this commentary after the deadline set by the State of South Dakota was past for receiving letters of support for raw milk small farm producers who are being targeted with “rule changes” and “laws” that are formulated to put them out of business. Why? For three reasons.

One. When the "raw milk" hearing was held in Pierre on November 17, there was only a ten day window given to file complaints and 10 days is not enough time for the supporters of raw milk, the small farm producers of, and those who chose to drink raw milk to even begin to get the word out state wide let alone nation wide. Not only that, the timing of the hearing was deliberately set to fall on the Thanksgiving Holiday week so as to make it extremely difficult for support to garnered.

Two. I wanted the rest of America and the world to know exactly what the hidden agenda of the State of South Dakota really is, and what it is proposing to do to raw milk producers and how this will affect those citizens who prefer raw milk over pasteurized.

Three. To expose who is really behind this criminal pogrom and how it affects our constitutional rights as American citizens.
I call this proposed new law targeting raw milk producers a pogrom. If you are familiar with the history of Stalinist Russia, then you will see parallels found in this definition with what the Agricultural Department of the state of South Dakota is proposing to do to small farm producers of raw milk in the name of “health and safety”.
Here is the Wikipedia definition POGROM.
"A pogrom is a form of riot directed against a particular group, whether ethnic, religious, or other, and characterized by killings and destruction of their homes, businesses, and religious centers. The term was originally used to denote extensive violence against Jews – either spontaneous or premeditated – but in English it is also applied to similar incidents against other minority groups."
What South Dakota raw milk producers are being faced with is a premeditated "politically orchestrated controlled riot" in the form of "national socialism” minus overt killings. This incognito form of genocide uses federal federal legislation as a template and was put in place by "fraudulent representatives of the people" who at the federal level, were lobbied by conglomerate pasteurized milk producers and suppliers of ingredients used in the production of pasteurized milk (such as Dean Foods, Monsanto, and Elanco) to buy their votes This allowed for the producers of inferior unhealthy pasteurized milk to monopolize the market and eliminate competition. The end result of the implementation of the new rules proposal or pogrom, will be literal destruction of their businessesof raw milk producers.
Not only that, the historically and scientifically proven health benefits of raw milk as a nutritional source for those choosing to consume raw milk over pasteurized, will also be the victim of this pogrom. If all the toxic, unhealthy, artificial-synthetic growth hormones, and the anti-biotic contaminates (see links below) were included in the definition of whether pasteurized milk was healthy or not, then the milk producers of would and should be “shut down” period. Disease causing ailments resulting from consumption of pasteurized milk and products made from, have been documented to far surpass any record of illness connected to consumption of raw milk or the products of both past or present.
The Dairy Division of the state of South Dakota knows full well (as do large corporate pasteurized milk producers) that raw milk producers are unable to economically abide by the demagogish, ill-legal, and un-constitutional legislation it is promoting. The vast majority of raw milk producers have neither the monies or resources to abide by the pogrom rules being proposed.

So now South Dakota is threatening raw milk producers using the new proposed new rules. Once the "new rules" become "law, the state of South Dakota will be able to have raw milk producers charged with breaking this prejudicial law that has no scientific credibility, criminalized, fined, property confiscated, and thrown in jail. Subsequently, they will lose their homes, their businesses will be destroyed and then they will have the added challange of worrying about how they will be able to feed and take care of their families.
You think not? Then read what happened to a Mennonite Raw Milk farmer in the state of Pennsylvania. Say pogrom and click here. Below are other links documenting the same in other states.
This is same political template and therefore, the premeditated pogrom goal of the State of South Dakota as it "goosesteps" behind the (funded by the pasteurized milk conglomerates) federal legislation which is now being implemented at state level and at the expense and loss of it's own state sovereignty if this attack against raw milk producers is fully implemented as proposed.
To display overt ignorance (or feigning the same) if not outright authoritarion arrogance on the part of the state of South Dakota’s Agriculture dairy program. I want you to read the below quotes from the mouth of the administrator of, Darwin Kurtenbach. Carefully note that what he alleges and how he threatens raw milk producers in South Dakota. He basically threatens them and implies they are already "guilty" of breaking the law which is NOT yet law while not even mentioning any factual evidence to support his position in condemning raw milk producers.

During the Nov. 17th hearing in Pierre, the state of South Dakota chose to evade the subject of scientific documentation about the health risks of raw milk. In other words, Kurtenbach and company are the least concerned about the health and welfare of the citizens of South Dakota while they lie in bed with large pasteurized milk producers.
In his interview, Kurtenbach is “parroting” the standard jargon used by oponents of raw milk to divert attention from the truth about “pasteurized” milk while demonizing raw milk and the producers of with regurgitated political and economic slander that profiles raw milk producers as “law breakers” and producers of unhealthy milk.
What Kurtenbach and South Dakota’s Agriculture administration does not want, is for the citizens of the state to neither have the right to produce a healthier milk then pasteurized for it’s citizens or the citizens to have the source for as well as the “FREEDOM” to chose on their own whether or not they want to drink raw milk.
Kurtenbach said the following:

"all of the rule changes are proposed because of public health concerns.
...basically, humans can carry a lot of diseases.
…there have been some cases of human illness linked to people drinking raw milk.
…about 15 years ago, there were reports of people getting sick from cheese made from raw milk.
…we know it’s going on. Raw milk is very dangerous,
…people raised on farms 50 years ago drank raw milk with little ill effects and got used to exposure to the bacteria.
…It’s a different world now…people want to go back to the old days…it’s not going to happen.
…There are a lot of serious health issues you can get from raw milk.”
So in order to “bypass” the whole issue of raw vs. pasteurized, the State of South Dakota has put in place the standard pogrom being used by and successfully put in place by other states in the United States in the form of the following rules to become law.
Read the State of SD Proposed Law pertaining to the sales of Raw Milk by small independent Raw Milk Producers. Click here to view.
Here is the response of small farm raw milk producers represented by Lila Streff, a raw milk producer who has a small family farm in Custer South Dakota where she raises goats who produce raw milk for human consumption. She and her customers and friends are appalled at what is happening but not totally surprised.

These are the key issues they oppose and why:
1). (12:05:07:15) --- Bottling Machine –Hand-Capping is Prohibited. The Proposed Law of an expensive bottling machine poses an economical barrier to the small farmer. There is no scientific proof that this is more sanitary than hand bottling. Washington State has proven this and omitted it in their statute. (It is good to quote this).
I have documented information on the prices of the Bottling Machine: $8,950 ; Bottles : (min purchase) 1 Pallet (1,344) of Quart (square) bottles @ $1,102 per pallet; and 1 Pallet (792) of Half Gallon bottles @ $1,188 per pallet; Caps : (4000 x $51.77 per thous.) = $207.08. Plus shipping and taxes on these.
2). (12:05:07:15) ---Barn Construction Requirements. An economical barrier is posed to the small farmer to construct a facility to meet all of their criteria just to sell a small quantity of milk. It is prejudicial to treat all farmers like a big dairy.
3). 12:05:07:17---The Proposed testing for coliform levels of 10 per mil. is too low. It practically comes out of the animal at that level. Other states require between 50 and 750 per mil. (Idaho and Connecticut - 50 per mil. are good examples to quote). SD is making it so low that it can't be passed -therefore we really won't be able to sell the Raw Milk.
4). 12:05:07:20--- Proposed Customer List---It is intrusive to the customer’s privacy to have to submit your personal information to a government list. They could call you and harass you! It is none of their business what you consume (what type of milk you drink and where you purchase it). This is a breach of privacy.
5). 12:05:07:22 ---TB and Brucellosis Tests --- Proposed Law is to do this twice/year. Once/year is adequate. To do the test the animal is injected with a serum. If you test more than once/year, the animal's body will think it has the diseases and throw a FALSE POSITIVE . These tests are expensive, and again an economic barrier to the farmer. They are also unhealthy for the animal.
6) 12:05:07:12 --- Permit to sell Raw milk ---The issue of freedom to choose would probably pertain to this proposal of having to hold a permit to sell. To get this permit, of course, you have to follow all of the other new proposed laws. However, If we don't have to have a permit, then the other laws do not pertain.
The consumer should be able to choose for themselves the most sanitary place to purchase upon visiting different farms that offer Raw Milk. This should not be a government controlled issue. This law directly affects the producer and the consumer.
Click here to read what Lila Streff shared in her interview in the Rapid City Journal.
Now to address and point out information the Dairy Division of the Department of Agriculture of the state of South Dakota does NOT want it’s citizens and you who are reading this to know.

The below information contained in the below links direct you to information and articles about raw milk vs. pasteurized, cases of pasteurized milk contamination, raw milk banned in the United States, raw milk producers jailed and property confiscated in the United States complements of the pogroms of the states of Ohio, Michigan, and Pennsylvania as well as in Canada.

You will see without any doubt, this is the path that South Dakota is duplicating. Raw milk producers in Canada are experiencing the same. One in particular who did his homework and has suffered unjustly because he chose not to capitulate to Canada’s agenda that has targeted small farm raw milk producers there.

Raw Milk Myths: Are We Prisoners of Pasteurization?

Real milk or not real milk?

Real Milk and Pasteurized Homogenized Milk Compared

Report in Favor of Raw Milk
Expert Report and Recommendations

Supplemental Report In Favor of Raw Milk

Growth hormone rbST safe and green, claims study
“Milk from cows given the growth hormone recombinant bovine somatropin (rbST) poses no human health threat and is identical to other milk, a review sponsored by hormone producer Elanco has said.”

Outbreak of Listeria monocytogenes Infections Associated with
Pasteurized Milk from a Local Dairy - Massachusetts, 2007

Listeria Blog – 95 percent of sources cited were NOT from raw milk and when raw milk was cited, it was a report citing the “danger of raw milk or products of” rather then actual cases of human sickness from Listeria iin a raw milk product.

Massive Outbreak of Antimicrobial-Resistant Salmonellosis Traced to Pasturized Milk
Two waves of antimicrobial-resistant Salmonella typhimurium infections in
Illinois totaling over 16000 culture-confirmed cases were traced to two brands
of pasteurized 2% milk produced by a single dairy plant. Salmonellosis was
associated with taking antimicrobials before onset of illness.
Two surveys to determine the number of persons who were actually affected yielded estimates of 168791 and 197581 persons, making this the largest outbreak of Salmonellosis ever identified in the United States.
The epidemic strain was easily identified because it had a rare antimicrobial resistance pattern and a highly unusual plasmid profile; study of stored isolates showed it had caused clusters of salmonellosis during the previous ten months that may have been related to the same plant, suggesting that the strain had persisted in the plant and
repeatedly contaminated milk after pasteurization.
(JAMA 1987;258:3269-3274)

PASTEURIZATION: Pulling the Plug on Scientific Fallacies Undergirding Our Industrial Food and Drug Culture

The pharmaceutical industry toasts to your ill health

Is rBGH is safe for cows and humans?

Raw Milk and the Michael Schmidt Case

Sneak Attack? Raw Milk Advocates Fear FDA Could Use Food Safety Bill to Require Pasteurization; Farming's Future

Michigan Department of Agriculture's harassment of Richard Hebron and the seizure of the raw milk products that he was delivering

No More Raw Milk In Ohio

Raw Milk – Attack and Counter Attack

Cracking Down Officials Order Farm To Stop Selling Raw Milk

Wisconsin: A state under seige by its own government

SDDA Proposes Rules to Create Defacto Ban on Raw Milk Sales in South Dakota

Here is the legislative policy adopted by the state of Missouri and passed on behalf of raw milk producers. Maybe the representatives of the legislature of South Dakota might look at this as an American model of fairness for small farm raw milk producers.
Consumers and Farmers Association (MOICFA), a Missouri based organization, waged a strong and successful campaign in favor of Raw Milk through passage of HB 1901. And yes, the Founding Fathers and Bill of Rights are part of their lobbying effort.
Issue: Free sale of raw milk in the state of Missouri

Economically: Allowing free sale of raw milk supports small family farms and the local economy - providing property tax funds that benefit the local community, public schools, county government, sheriff's departments, and emergency services.

Socially: Pick up and delivery of raw milk causes gathering of like-minded individuals with the same approach toward life
Environmentally: Raw milk is responsible, local agriculture that reduces our carbon imprint on our planet.

Safety: Raw milk farmed and consumed by conscientious individuals poses no more of a threat to consumers than does pasteurized milk or raw chicken sold in stores.

Healthy: Raw milk supports preventative healthcare, reducing the burden on the state by contributing to reduced allergies, obesity, asthma, stomach ailments, etc.

Dietary: Raw milk is the only ingredient suitable for certain dishes, nutritional drinks, and delectable treats.

Scientifically: Raw milk is full of nutrients, and has immune and health-promoting effects that are destroyed during pasteurization. Babies do not thrive well on pasteurized milk.

Constitutionally: Raw milk gives the people a reason to peaceably assemble, which is protected by the 1st Amendment.

The 14th Amendment, Section 1 states, "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

I would like everyone to send both letters and emails to the principles representing the State of South Dakota in both the legislature and in the Dairy and Agricultural divisions. I am asking you to do this knowing the 10 day deadline is passed so that they have the choice of either dismissing your support for the raw milk producers or allowing for further support to be taken into consideration. I call this a moral and ethical “litmus test” for the them personally as well as for the government representatives of the people of the state of South Dakota.

Otherwise, as it already has been surmised that by intentionally setting a 10 day window DURING THE HOLIDAYS and limit for raw milk producers to gather support against the proposed rules, the State of South Dakota’s Agricultural Department knew full well that they would be able to justify making the rule changes a proposed “law” because of the limited response given the 10 day window and this was a part of a greater premeditated plan intended to accomplish one thing, to destroy the pasteurized dairy conglomerates competition and thus the businesses of raw milk producers while “we the people” are secondary victims of a un-constitutional attack on us that deprives us of our freedom to chose for ourselves that which is healthy for us or not.

It should be noted that raw milk producers were warned that this planning schedule would intentionally be set by elements in the Dairy division around the holidays. The families of raw milk producers, supporters and consumers of, had to scramble to get everyone to send their letters by Tuesday the 17th that week to get them there by Friday the 27th because of the Thanksgiving holiday in between.

So what does the Dairy Division of State of South Dakota do in their benevolent spirit of understanding and respect during the Holy Days Season? They schedule the next hearing before the Rules Review committee first on Dec.15 but they later move it to Dec. 21, the Monday before Christmas!

This is not only disrespectful but EVIL and yet tax dollars of the citizens of South Dakota pay the wages of such insensitive individuals who have no conscience or do they care about the affect this will have on the families and children of small farm milk producers in South Dakota. I call it premeditated HATE on their part!

Also, the State of South Dakota has a 75 day window to the new rules proposal passed and if that fails, they get to resubmit it and it won't be addressed again until April. They are in a rush. Rumors are when the next hearing debate takes place with 6 people on the Rules Review, the State of South Dakota already has stacked the deck with a vice chair who is an RN who spoke out animatedly against raw milk on a local radio channel.

This “new rules” proposal of the state of South Dakota exposes their pogrom agenda. I believe it is to allow for the 4th Reich of the Rich food conglomerates and their authoritarian socialist mandates which are endorsed and pimped by the FDA through the Dairy Division of the State of South Dakota, to continue to give them more control over our food, health, and freedoms as a state, nation, and people. Some folks call this the New World Order. I call it pure evil authored and inspired direct from the throne of hell itself and which the State of South Dakota appears to be a willing partner of.

State of South Dakota Dairy Division Contact Information:

Keven Fridley, Division Director of Agricultural Services for Dairy: Email:

Darwin Kurtenbach. Administrator for the South Dakota State Department of Agriculture dairy program - 523 East Capitol, Foss Building. Pierre, SD 57501-3182. (605) 773-3724. (605) 773-3481.His email address:

William Even. Secretary of Agriculture for the State of South Dakota
Email address:

Written correspondence can be sent to:
South Dakota Department of Agriculture
Division of Agriculture Services
Dairy & Egg Office
523 E. Capitol Ave.
Pierre, SD 57501

Here is contact information for Lila Streff:
Streff Ridge Farm and Goat Dairy
12376 Beaver Den Dr
Custer, SD 57730

For those of you who do in fact send a communication to the above representatives of the State of South Dakota, I would ask of you two things. Be respectful and let Lila and myself know if in fact you do respond. Thank you.

Richard Boyden

Founder and President of Operation Morning Star - a 501 c3 not for profit charity, Writer and Investigative Journalist, Counselor/Minister in the area of Suicide among Native American Youth, Radio Talk Show Host, Former Marine, and former instructor at Haskell Indian Nations University,

Good as Gold-- or not

As I am quite fond of saying, if you don't have enough baking powder, bullets and beans, you really shouldn't be investing in gold.....Now it comes to light that even the gold is part of the delusion or "image of normalcy" that is so essential to keep us peasants in our proper position. There were a few articles out on this in the past several weeks, but this one has a good amount of detail, and I thought it quite worth sharing. Definitely more false weights and measures.

Fake gold bars! What's next?

It's one thing to counterfeit a twenty or hundred dollar bill. The amount of financial damage is usually limited to a specific region and only affects dozens of people and thousands of dollars. Secret Service agents quickly notify the banks on how to recognize these phony bills and retail outlets usually have procedures in place (such as special pens to test the paper) to stop their proliferation.

But what about gold? This is the most sacred of all commodities because it is thought to be the most trusted, reliable and valuable means of saving wealth.

A recent discovery -- in October of 2009 -- has been suppressed by the main stream media but has been circulating among the "big money" brokers and financial kingpins and is just now being revealed to the public. It involves the gold in Fort Knox -- the US Treasury gold -- that is the equity of our national wealth. In short, millions (with an "m") of gold bars are fake!

Who did this? Apparently our own government.


In October of 2009 the Chinese received a shipment of gold bars. Gold is regularly exchanges between countries to pay debts and to settle the so-called balance of trade. Most gold is exchanged and stored in vaults under the supervision of a special organization based in London, the London Bullion Market Association (or LBMA). When the shipment was received, the Chinese government asked that special tests be performed to guarantee the purity and weight of the gold bars. In this test, four small holed are drilled into the gold bars and the metal is then analyzed.

Officials were shocked to learn that the bars were fake. They contained cores of tungsten with only a outer coating of real gold. What's more, these gold bars, containing serial numbers for tracking, originated in the US and had been stored in Fort Knox for years. There were reportedly between 5,600 to 5,700 bars, weighing 400 oz. each, in the shipment!

At first many gold experts assumed the fake gold originated in China, the world's best knock-off producers. The Chinese were quick to investigate and issued a statement that implicated the US in the scheme.

What the Chinese uncovered:

Roughly 15 years ago -- during the Clinton Administration [think Robert Rubin, Sir Alan Greenspan and Lawrence Summers] -- between 1.3 and 1.5 million 400 oz tungsten blanks were allegedly manufactured by a very high-end, sophisticated refiner in the USA [more than 16 Thousand metric tonnes]. Subsequently, 640,000 of these tungsten blanks received their gold plating and WERE shipped to Ft. Knox and remain there to this day.

According to the Chinese investigation, the balance of this 1.3 million to 1.5 million 400 oz tungsten cache was also gold plated and then allegedly "sold" into the international market. Apparently, the global market is literally "stuffed full of 400 oz salted bars". Perhaps as much as 600-billion dollars worth.

An obscure news item originally published in the N.Y. Post [written by Jennifer Anderson] in late Jan. 04 perhaps makes sense now.

DA investigating NYMEX executive

Manhattan, New York, --Feb. 2, 2004. A top executive at the New York Mercantile Exchange is being investigated by the Manhattan district attorney. Sources close to the exchange said that Stuart Smith, senior vice president of operations at the exchange, was served with a search warrant by the district attorney's office last week. Details of the investigation have not been disclosed, but a NYMEX spokeswoman said it was unrelated to any of the exchange's markets. She declined to comment further other than to say that charges had not been brought. A spokeswoman for the Manhattan district attorney's office also declined comment."

The offices of the Senior Vice President of Operations -- NYMEX -- is exactly where you would go to find the records [serial number and smelter of origin] for EVERY GOLD BAR ever PHYSICALLY settled on the exchange. They are required to keep these records. These precise records would show the lineage of all the physical gold settled on the exchange and hence "prove" that the amount of gold in question could not have possibly come from the U.S. mining operations -- because the amounts in question coming from U.S. smelters would undoubtedly be vastly bigger than domestic mine production.

No one knows whatever happened to Stuart Smith. After his offices were raided he took "administrative leave" from the NYMEX and he has never been heard from since. Amazingly, there never was any follow up on in the media on the original story as well as ZERO developments ever stemming from D.A. MorgenthauĆ¢€™s office who executed the search warrant.

Are we to believe that NYMEX offices were raided, the Sr. V.P. of operations then takes leave -- all for nothing?

The revelations of fake gold bars also explains another highly unusual story that also happened in 2004:

LONDON, April 14, 2004 (Reuters) -- NM Rothschild & Sons Ltd., the London-based unit of investment bank Rothschild [ROT.UL], will withdraw from trading commodities, including gold, in London as it reviews its operations, it said on Wednesday.

Interestingly, GATA's Bill Murphy speculated about this back in 2004;

"Why is Rothschild leaving the gold business at this time my colleagues and I conjectured today? Just a guess on my part, but [I] suspect something is amiss. They know a big scandal is coming and they don't want to be a part of it... [The] Rothschild wants out before the proverbial "S" hits the fan." -- BILL MURPHY, LEMETROPOLE, 4-18-2004

What is the GATA?

The Gold Antitrust Action Committee (GATA) is an organisation which has been nipping at the heels of the US Treasury Federal Reserve for several years now. The basis of GATA's accusations is that these institutions, in coordination with other complicit central banks and the large gold-trading investment banks in the US, have been manipulating the price of gold for decades.

What is the GLD?

GLD is a short form for Good London Delivery. The London Bullion Market Association (LBMA) has defined "good delivery" as a delivery from an entity which is listed on their delivery list or meets the standards for said list and whose bars have passed testing requirements established by the associatin and updated from time to time. The bars have to be pure for AU in an area of 995.0 to 999.9 per 1000. Weight, Shape, Appearance, Marks and Weight Stamps are regulated as follows:

Weight: minimum 350 fine ounces AU; maximum 430 fine ounces AU, gross weight of a bar is expressed in troy ounces, in multiples of 0.025, rounded down to the nearest 0.025 of an troy ounce.

Dimensions: the recommended dimensions for a Good Delivery gold bar are: Top Surface: 255 x 81 mm; Bottom Surface: 236 x 57 mm; Thickness: 37 mm.

Fineness: the minimum 995.0 parts per thousand fine gold. Marks: Serial number; Assay stamp of refiner; Fineness (to four significant figures); Year of manufacture (expressed in four digits).

After reviewing their prospectus yet again, it becomes pretty clear that GLD was established to purposefully deflect investment dollars away from legitimate gold pursuits and to create a stealth, cesspool / catch-all, slush-fund and a likely destination for many of these fake tungsten bars where they would never see the light of day -- hidden behind the following legalese "shield" from the law:

[Excerpt from the GLD prospectus on page 11]

"Gold bars allocated to the Trust in connection with the creation of a Basket may not meet the London Good Delivery Standards and, if a Basket is issued against such gold, the Trust may suffer a loss. Neither the Trustee nor the Custodian independently confirms the fineness of the gold bars allocated to the Trust in connection with the creation of a Basket. The gold bars allocated to the Trust by the Custodian may be different from the reported fineness or weight required by the LBMAĆ¢€™s standards for gold bars delivered in settlement of a gold trade, or the London Good Delivery Standards, the standards required by the Trust. If the Trustee nevertheless issues a Basket against such gold, and if the Custodian fails to satisfy its obligation to credit the Trust the amount of any deficiency, the Trust may suffer a loss."

The Federal Reserve knows but is apparently part of the scheme

Earlier this year GATA filed a second Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with the Federal Reserve System for documents from 1990 to date having to do with gold swaps, gold swapped, or proposed gold swaps.

On Aug. 5, The Federal Reserve responded to this FOIA request by adding two more documents to those disclosed to GATA in April 2008 from the earlier FOIA request. These documents totaled 173 pages, many parts of which were redacted (blacked out). The Fed's response also noted that there were 137 pages of documents not disclosed that were alleged to be exempt from disclosure.

GATA appealed this determination on Aug. 20. The appeal asked for more information to substantiate the legitimacy of the claimed exemptions from disclosure and an explanation on why some documents, such as one posted on the Federal Reserve Web site that discusses gold swaps, were not included in the Aug. 5 document release.

In a Sept. 17, 2009, letter on Federal Reserve System letterhead, Federal Reserve governor Kevin M. Warsh completely denied GATA's appeal. The entire text of this letter can be examined at

The first paragraph on the third page is the most revealing.

"In connection with your appeal, I have confirmed that the information withheld under exemption 4 consists of confidential commercial or financial information relating to the operations of the Federal Reserve Banks that was obtained within the meaning of exemption 4. This includes information relating to swap arrangements with foreign banks on behalf of the Federal Reserve System and is not the type of information that is customarily disclosed to the public. This information was properly withheld from you."

The above statement is an admission that the Federal Reserve has been involved with the fake gold bar swaps and that it refuses to disclose any information about its activities!

Why use tungsten?

If you are going to print fake money you need to have the special paper, otherwise the bills don't feel right and can be easily detected by special pens that most merchants and banks use. Likewise, if you are going to fake gold bars you had better be sure they have the same weight and properties of real gold.

In early 2008 millions of dollars in gold at the central bank of Ethiopia turned out to be fake. What were supposed to be bars of solid gold turned out to be nothing more than gold-plated steel. They tried to sell the stuff to South Africa and it was sent back when the South Africans noticed this little problem.

The problem with making good-quality fake gold is that gold is remarkably dense. It's almost twice the density of lead, and two-and-a-half times more dense than steel. You don't usually notice this because small gold rings and the like don't weigh enough to make it obvious, but if you've ever held a larger bar of gold, it's absolutely unmistakable: The stuff is very, very heavy.

The standard gold bar for bank-to-bank trade, known as a "London good delivery bar" weighs 400 troy ounces (over thirty-three pounds), yet is no bigger than a paperback novel. A bar of steel the same size would weigh only thirteen and a half pounds.

According to gold expert, Theo Gray, the problem is that there are very few metals that are as dense as gold, and with only two exceptions they all cost as much or more than gold.

The first exception is depleted uranium, which is cheap if you're a government, but hard for individuals to get. It's also radioactive, which could be a bit of an issue.

The second exception is a real winner: tungsten. Tungsten is vastly cheaper than gold (maybe $30 dollars a pound compared to $12,000 a pound for gold right now). And remarkably, it has exactly the same density as gold, to three decimal places. The main differences are that it's the wrong color, and that it's much, much harder than gold. (Very pure gold is quite soft, you can dent it with a fingernail.)

A top-of-the-line fake gold bar should match the color, surface hardness, density, chemical, and nuclear properties of gold perfectly. To do this, you could could start with a tungsten slug about 1/8-inch smaller in each dimension than the gold bar you want, then cast a 1/16-inch layer of real pure gold all around it. This bar would feel right in the hand, it would have a dead ring when knocked as gold should, it would test right chemically, it would weigh *exactly* the right amount, and though I don't know this for sure, I think it would also pass an x-ray fluorescence scan, the 1/16" layer of pure gold being enough to stop the x-rays from reaching any tungsten. You'd pretty much have to drill it to find out it's fake.

Such a top-quality fake London good delivery bar would cost about $50,000 to produce because it's got a lot of real gold in it, but you'd still make a nice profit considering that a real one is worth closer to $400,000.

What's going to happen now?

Politicians like Ron Paul have been demanding that the Federal Reserve be more transparent and open up their records for public scrutiny. But the Fed has consistently refused, stating that these disclosures would undermine its operation. Yes, it certainly would!

UPDATE: Audit of Fed Reserve Amendment Passes!

In an unprecedented defeat for the Federal Reserve, an amendment to audit the multi-trillion dollar institution was approved by the House Finance Committee with an overwhelming and bipartisan 43-26 vote on Thursday afternoon despite harried last-minute lobbying from top Fed officials and the surprise opposition of Chairman Barney Frank (D-Mass.), who had previously been a supporter.

The measure, cosponsored by Reps. Ron Paul (R-Texas) and Alan Grayson (D-Fla.), authorizes the Government Accountability Office to conduct a wide-ranging audit of the Fed's opaque deals with foreign central banks and major U.S. financial institutions. The Fed has never had a real audit in its history and little is known of what it does with the trillions of dollars at its disposal.

The manufacture of fake gold bars goes back years and, because of this, it is not likely that the originator of this scheme will ever be revealed or brought to justice. Meanwhile the world is just beginning to learn that much of its national reserves of gold may be fake. If more testing reveals that this gold was guaranteed by Fort Knox and the US Treasury then perhaps they will demand an exchange for "real" gold -- wouldn't you?

This is all happening at a time when the US economy is at its lowest and most vulnerable. The effects could be devastating.

Some investors are already selling gold commodities before these facts are widely known. They are investing instead in silver -- the next best metal. This will undoubtedly drive silver prices up.

According to Jim Willie, 24 year market analyst and Ph.D in statistics, "The bust cometh, and it will be spectacular. The stories told in the press will be peculiar, since not told objectively. The headlines might be a comedy, with phony reports of foreign subterfuge, when the perpetrators are home grown."

This is yet another story in the decline of America and capitalism -- a decline based on greed, deception and fraud.
#############end article

Monday, December 7, 2009

--- NAIS is Contagious----

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

©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……

Saturday, December 5, 2009

The Food Fight Continues!....and more

In just a little while I will be doing a show with Darol Dickinson of Ohio the proprietor of and as well as the one he has become notorious for, You can listen to the show at live from 5-6pm Central time every Saturday and go to the archives to get other shows.

Darol and I will be discussing imports, and the insanity of the US chasing export markets for our beef, the NLIS and what is happening there in Australia because of this program (NAIS is the US version with the same requirements....because it isn't a US program, ahem) and also a good deal on direct marketing if we can fit it in. I really enjoy Darol and believe you will find him entertaining AND informative!

In other issues, the raw milk war rages on. In Georgia, it is illegal to sell raw milk, so those who want to drink it and haven't got their own dairy animals generally go to South Carolina and buy it there. Well, the FDA and the Georgiacrats have decided to put the kaibosh on that. They pulled over a van of a fellow bringing milk back for several people who had purchased it for themselves and made him dump it on the ground. It's like asking your neighbor to pick up sugar and then having the cops make him dump it. Ludicrous, but this is the land of the free and all that jazz. You can go to this website to learn more about the Georgia battle:

In South Dakota, heavy handed state officials are also beefing up their anti raw milk squads and in Missouri, they are doing the same.

I will be posting more on the SD and Missouri issues tomorrow. Next week, I will be blessed to have Richard Boyden on my show, and we will be on a tear about this and other issues.

As you know, is the place to get Truth Farmer radio shows. They have a number of other excellent shows and hosts, and are doing a tremendous service for the cause of freedom and getting knowledge out there so that we can tell what time it really is. This station does NOT charge it's hosts or affiliates for the programs they air. They rely on advertising and listener support. If you can, please go to their new donations page and make contribution. Little amounts add up and truly do matter, so please, go to and give a little bit if you can. They will put it to good use and have been wonderful to work with and a real blessing to me personally.

Thanks so much for caring about freedom and for actively opposing complete control!

Tuesday, November 17, 2009

Ukrainian Super Flu News

I hope all the clickable links come through on this, but if not, please go and read through this article if you want to read the links. I asked for callers to call in to my show last week on this topic if they knew much about it, and alas, had no takers. This is the best comprehensive and sensible article I have yet to come across. Please do yourself a favor and read it. Thanks!!!

Originally published November 16 2009
H1N1 "super flu" plague in Ukraine spark concern, conspiracy theories about origins

by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, NaturalNews Editor

(NaturalNews) Here's what we know with some degree of certainty about the H1N1 virus in Ukraine right now: nearly 300 people have died from the viral strain, and over 65,000 people have been hospitalized (the actual numbers are increasing by the hour). The virus appears to be either a highly aggressive mutation of the globally-circulating H1N1 strain, or a combination of three different influenza strains now circulating in Ukraine. Some observers suspect this new "super flu" might be labeled viral hemorrhagic pneumonia (meaning it destroys lung tissue until your lungs bleed so much that you drown in your own fluid), but that has not been confirmed by any official sources we're aware of.

Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko has issued emergency quarantine orders for nine of the country's regions and ordered the deployment of mobile military hospitals. He announced that the nation had been simultaneously hit with two different seasonal flu strains plus H1N1 -- and then hinted that all three might have recombined into the deadly new Ukrainian super flu.

In his own words, as reported by Daily Mail, "Unlike similar epidemics in other countries, three causes of serious viral infections came together simultaneously in Ukraine: two seasonal flus and the Californian flu. Virologists conclude that this combination of infections may produce an even more aggressive new virus as a result of mutation."

On November 6, Ukraine's Deputy Health Minister Zinovy Mytnyk announced that over 600,000 citizens had already caught the new flu. British scientists are now conducting tests on the new viral strain to find out why it appears to be so deadly (

The mainstream media is blaming Ukraine's poor health care system for the relatively high rates of hospitalization and death (, but they refuse to mention (yet again) the vitamin D deficiency found across this population living at high latitude in the winter, where sunlight is relatively scarce.

Here's a useful blog for staying up to date on the Ukrainian plague:
What we don't know

Now here's what we don't know about the Ukraine outbreak:

What is the actual genetic composition of this mutated strain?

Scientists have not released any meaningful news about the genetic sequence of the Ukraine strain. For the moment, the WHO is somewhat quiet on the matter. The last WHO update was from November 3 (and the situation has become considerably worse since). (

Was this viral strain released as a bioweapon?

There are numerous reports circulating widely across the 'net that cite aerial spraying across Kiev in the days before the new "super flu" outbreak. People are speculating that this was a bioweapon attack intentionally unleashed upon the Ukrainian population. So far, NaturalNews can find no credible information supporting this theory, but it remains a possibility to be researched further.

Does Baxter Pharmaceuticals have anything to do with the outbreak?

You may recall that earlier this year, Baxter shipped live avian flu viral material to labs in 18 countries, including one in the Ukraine. ( There is suspicion that Baxter could be tied to a planned outbreak of a weaponized virus as a population control bioweapon of some sort, but NaturalNews has not been unable to find any credible information sources supporting this theory. Lacking any better leads on this subject, as far as we can tell right now this remains an unproven conspiracy theory. (If anyone has more credible info on this, please send it our way for review.)

It is plausible that Baxter had something to do with this, but we just don't have any convincing evidence to back it up at this point.
H1N1 vaccines likely offer little protect against the Ukraine super flu

People receiving H1N1 vaccine shots right now need to know that currently-available H1N1 vaccine shots may offer no protection whatsoever against the "Ukraine Strain." That's because once the virus mutates, changing it genetic structure, it can instantly render all existing vaccines obsolete.

Depending on the degree of genetic changes, there is a possibility that some level of immunity may be conferred to people who already have H1N1 antibodies, but here's the dirty little secret the vaccine industry doesn't want you to know: People who built their own natural immunity to H1N1 through exposure rather than vaccines have a much greater likelihood of exhibiting natural immunity to genetic variations of H1N1. In other words, people who overcame H1N1 exposure on their own, without being vaccinated, have a far stronger defense against H1N1 variations that might appear.

This is yet another reason why flu vaccines are so dangerous: The deny your immune system the important opportunity to exercise its own adaptive defenses and build stronger protections against future infections.

One possible scenario that could unfold with all this is that the Ukraine strain might spread around the world, wiping out those who got vaccinated against H1N1 because their immune systems suffer from a suppressed ability to naturally generate antibodies to a new strain. Meanwhile, drug companies will try to scramble and create a whole new batch of "super flu" vaccines, but they're always too little, too late. Theoretically, millions of people could die around the world while waiting in line for yet another vaccine shot.

All they really need is vitamin D3, some herbal anti-virals, a healthy diet and plenty of rest, but no one is telling them that.

Even the Ukraine super flu is no match for a healthy immune system. Remember: Out of 65,000+ hospitalizations, fewer than 300 people have died so far. That's still a very low mortality rate, even if the spread of the viral infection seems aggressive.
WHO cranking up anti-viral drug push

Meanwhile, the WHO is upping its push for anti-viral drugs, saying that drugs like Tamiflu should now be used earlier on swine flu victims (

They still won't recommend anti-viral herbs, foods, supplements or natural remedies, of course. The WHO remains a faithful pusher of Big Pharma's profit agenda, even while denying the People of the world the truth about how they can save their own lives with anti-viral natural remedies. To both the WHO and CDC, the swine flu pandemic has always been about pushing a pharmaceutical agenda at the expense of public health.

Had the public been informed about vitamin D and natural anti-virals like Lomatium, many lives could have already been saved. Instead, the drug pushers at the CDC and WHO have tens of millions of people standing in line waiting for vaccines instead of consuming natural supplements and remedies that could help protect them from influenza.

The profit agenda forces us to wonder: With the current H1N1 strain fizzling out -- and yet billions of dollars worth of vaccines still needing to be sold -- could the Ukraine strain have been engineered to scare up more demand and more sales of vaccines and anti-virals?

That's a question that all thinking people need to be asking right now. But we also need to be careful in assessing what's true here. Reading the postings about this on the 'net, I've noticed way too many people leaping to assumptions about what's happening in the Ukraine without any real evidence to back that up. The reports about Joseph Moshe, in particular, appear to be a complete hoax.

While it's possible this was an engineered bioweapon of some sort, it's not enough to just assume that's true and then declare it to be so. More evidence is needed before NaturalNews would back a theory like that.

We'll keep you posted on what we find. New documents tend to come our way after we post the first story on a subject like this, often leading to a follow-up story that benefits from more information.

Sources for this story include:

Saturday, October 31, 2009

Let the enforcements begin!!!

This is the first time in the United States that someone has been fined for failing to compromise their property rights through registration of their property as a premises into an international program pushed by the World Trade Organization and the UN……We have more to look forward to as the article states. They already have several more people lined up. One problem they may face is the Emanuel J. Miller trial. He has a literal and Constitutionally secured religious objection to the NAIS program, and will soon go back to trial. Keep checking back for more on that. It is certain to get even more interesting as things progress……For those IN Wisconsin, if you don't start really aggressively pushing your legislators to halt this it will only become much, much worse. Don't look for a leader----Be one!

Polk County Cattle Producer First Convicted in Premises Registration Law Violation

By Sarah Young, Livestock Editor
Thursday, October 29, 2009 4:13 PM CDT

Polk County cattle producer, Patrick Monchilovich, 39, of Cumberland was the first to be found guilty of violating Wisconsin’s livestock premises registration law.

Monchilovich was ordered to pay close to $400.

Although not the first violation addressed in the court system, it is first conviction.

“This is the first case that has turned its way all the way through the system,” said DATCP spokesperson, Donna Gilson.

The 4-year-old premises registration law took effect in November 2005. Monchilovich has 60 days to appeal the judge’s decision.

The premises registration law requires that any property where livestock are held must be registered in a central database and assigned a number. The registration lists what species are on the premises.

According to Gilson, the cattle producer was contacted on several occasions through the outlined process, but he did not comply with the law.

According to documents filed by the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection, Monchilovich was first contacted by telephone in April 2008 to inform him that he needed to register his premises, on which he was keeping cattle. He declined. An animal health inspector visited him later that month, and he still refused to register. In May 2008, he refused delivery of a certified warning letter, which was then hand-delivered to him during a final visit by the inspector and a compliance officer in June 2008.

Charges were filed in Polk County Circuit Court by District Attorney Daniel Steffen on Feb. 26, and Monchilovich pleaded not guilty on March 17. The case came to trial on Oct. 21, when he was found guilty by Judge Molly GaleWyrick and ordered to pay a $200 civil forfeiture and about $190 in court costs.

According to Gilson, most non-compliant individuals are discovered during the licensing process or via other paperwork sent to DATCP for processing where premises registration numbers are required.

Those individuals without premises registration are contacted via series of steps, same used for Monchilovich, she said. If still non-compliant, then documentation is given to the county District Attorney (DA) for possible charges.

“They (District Attorney) don’t have to file charges,” she explained. Currently, DATCP has referred documentation for four more possible cases in Richland, Price and two in Pierce Counties. Gilson says there are another seven that will likely be referred in the near future.

Gilson says that these cases are all non-religious related. DATCP is awaiting the final word from the pending Clark County case where Emanuel Miller Jr., 28, of Loyal was charged with a civil forfeiture for failure to comply with the state's livestock-premises registration law last year. Many in the Amish community believe the requirement infringes on their religious beliefs because it could eventually result in the tagging of all animals, or the 'Mark of the Beast.'

DATCP will not be pursuing any cases involving right to religious freedom, mostly affecting Wisconsin’s Amish communities, until a final ruling is reached in the Clark County case. Gilson says there is no timeline for the final ruling, by Clark County circuit court judge Jon Counsell.

Unregistered premises were discovered in the 2007 pseudorabies outbreak in pigs in Clark County.

When there is a disease outbreak, state animal health officials can look at the database to find susceptible animals for testing and/or provide information to the owners of the animals about the disease. The law is intended to speed up the process of finding potentially exposed animals when there is a disease outbreak. A speedier response protects animal and public health, limits losses to individual producers, and reduces economic damage to the state as a whole.

“Our goal is to get them to register there premises,” Gilson explains. “It’s about protecting our animal health.”

Saturday, October 24, 2009

Truth Farmer Radio Show 10/24

I have been terribly neglectful in working this blog, and am going to try to make a much more serious effort at keeping this up to date….In that spirit, I want to let everyone know that today, October 24th, 2009, I will be having Pastor Glenn Guest visit about the times and troubles we currently have in this lovely surveillance society we are engaged in.

Pastor Guest is a tremendous inspiration. You can read his book for FREE online at his website:

I have done so, and it is no surprise that the same MO is being used to push all of these things upon us.

You can listen to the show online:

You can also have your non internet friends listen live through the call in number:


And if you want to call in to make a comment or ask a question the number is:


I am terrifically happy with this network! It loads quickly and people with dial up (slow dial up, that is!) have no problem listening on line. They also have the shows available as archives very soon after the show is done, so if you missed it, you can download and listen to it at a convenient time! I am thrilled and couldn't be more pleased with the mechanics of the network. They also have several radio station affiliates, and if you look at the site and don't see your local talk radio station listed, you should give them a ring and let them know they are missing a great opportunity to carry shows that CAN make a difference!!!

If you'd be interested in sponsoring "Truth Farmer" via an ad for your business or organization, please feel free to contact me via email at…..Thanks!!!

NAIS Enforcement Begins....

The first court case with a verdict regarding NAIS in the United States has come out on the side of those who wish to mandate this ridiculous system. The article below is the only thing available on the net at this time, and the person in Wisconsin with the most information isn't sharing it yet, so.....the best I can do is tell you that this is a bad, bad thing. Unfortunately, because of the defense he used, it was also rather predictable. Sad day for freedom.....

Polk County judge orders beef rancher to register premises

By Heidi Clausen
Regional Editor
BALSAM LAKE - A Polk County judge has ruled in favor of the state of Wisconsin in the state's second case of a farmer refusing to register a livestock premises.
Cumberland cattle rancher Patrick Monchilovich, 39, faced trial Oct. 21 in Balsam Lake for not registering his premises as required by the state's livestock premises registration law.
It took Judge Molly GaleWyrick less than a half-hour to decide that the state of Wisconsin had met its burden of proof in the case, and she granted the motion for a directed verdict.
Assistant District Attorney Moria Ludvigson told the judge that the state was requesting Monchilovich' s compliance plus a civil forfeiture fee.
GaleWyrick ordered Monchilovich to pay $389.50 within 60 days.
About 25 farmers and others showed up in the courtroom to support Monchilovich and his wife, Melissa.
A few people snickered when GaleWyrick told Monchilovich, "You can do whatever you want to; this is a free country."
After admonishing the crowd, she said Monchilovich' s disobedience of the law meant he would have to pay a penalty.
"They're taking away freedoms," Monchilovich told The Country Today after the hearing was adjourned.
He said he will consult with his wife before deciding whether to appeal the decision.
Monchilovich refused to register his farm, and received multiple visits from state officials in 2008.
District Attorney Dan Steffen filed a complaint against Monchilovich on Feb. 25. Monchilovich entered a not guilty plea in March, arguing that the costs incurred by farmers far outweigh the rewards of premises ID and the National Animal Identification System.
He said he keeps his Simmental herd on property that's separate from his McKinley area home. He said he owns the land, having inherited it after his mother's death.
Monchilovich argued in court that he doesn't have an official "premises," so is not required to comply with the law.
"The only way you can get a premises is to apply for one," he said. "We don't have one so, therefore, we're not required to register one."
GaleWyrick argued that a person can't avoid regulations simply by not doing something.
She said that, by admitting that he owns the property, has livestock there and has not registered his premises, Monchilovich has admitted his violation of the statute.
She said her court isn't the proper venue in which to argue against administrative code.
"(The state has) proven the elements of a violation of the statute, so I don't believe you have any defense to that," she told Monchilovich.
She said that Monchilovich incorrectly interpreted the language of the law and manipulated it to his own advantage.
"You don't get to pick and choose. You have to look at it in its totality," she said. "You're doing what first-year law students do. You pull out a part of the statute that you want to apply and take it out of context."
GaleWyrick said Monchilovich presented no reason that would exempt him from having to register.
"This applies to you," she said. "There's absolutely no logic I can think of that would exempt a single person."
Melissa Monchilovich said she fears that compliance with the premises registration law will lead to more problems.
"They're looking for compliance so that, down the line, they can make more rules and do things that we object to," she said.
The Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection in 2003 became the first agricultural agency in the U.S. to implement mandatory livestock premises registration.
Anyone who keeps livestock must register that location with the state.
The program is designed to protect animal health and food-chain security by facilitating a more rapid response to animal disease outbreaks.
Each premises is assigned a registration number. There is no fee to register a premises, and registration must be renewed every three years.
The Monchilovich case is the second time DATCP has taken action against a farmer for refusing to register their premises.
Amish dairy farmer Emanuel Miller Jr. of Loyal appeared in a Clark County courtroom Sept. 23 regarding his refusal to register his premises. He opposes the program because it violates his religious beliefs.
A decision in the Miller case is expected later this year.
Heidi Clausen can be reached at clausen@amerytel. net.

http://www.thecount story-news. asp?id=BLH90P4H0 0I

Thursday, August 13, 2009

Welcome to the Global Plantation

Welcome to the Global Plantation
HR 2749 Authorizes International Take-Over of Domestic Food Production

© Doreen Hannes 2009

Congressional staffers have been telling people that HR 2749, the Food Safety Enhancement Act of 2009, does not authorize the National Animal Identification System (NAIS). Many organic groups have agreed with them. However, this is misleading. Though HR 2749 does not name "the" National Animal Identification System, it still authorizes the program. It also does not state that it legally authorizes Good Agricultural Practices, or GAP, partially comprising Codex guidelines on traceability and food safety, and the OIE's Guide to Good Farming Practices including auditing, certification and inspections, disincentives for not participating in the form of fines, penalties, and loss of access to market, but it does. Is it possible that Congress was not aware of what it voted on? The bill was changed three times in a 24-hour period before passing the House 283-142 on July 30, 2009.

Are these assertions about HR 2749 wild and unsubstantiated? Proving them is fairly easy—just understand “Good Agricultural Practices” (GAP), how the agencies of the World Trade Organization operate within member countries to achieve them and what comprises the actual jurisdiction of the FDA and USDA. A brief explanation follows, along with substantiating quotes from HR 2749.

First we look to jurisdiction in HR2749….

"Nothing in this Act or any amendment made by this Act shall be construed to alter the jurisdiction between the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of Health and Human Services, under applicable statutes and regulations…" (p.3&4)

Then, tossing our preconceived notions to the wind and looking to law instead, we find that congressional testimony of the FDA on establishing a single food safety agency and a myriad of other sources including the FAO (Food and Ag Organization of the UN), the FDA statements on the Bioterrorism Act of 2002, and many books on food law affirm that FDA has jurisdiction over live food animals:

"FDA is the Federal agency that regulates 80 percent of the nation’s food supply-everything we eat except for meat, poultry, and certain egg products, which are regulated by our partners at USDA. FDA’s responsibility extends to live food animals…"

So then what is the authority of the USDA? It is over agricultural disease, animals in the slaughter channel or transport, marketing (like grading of eggs and certification of processes) and the end product of many (but not all) food animals; meat. This is why NAIS always had to be "about disease" because the USDA couldn't run it otherwise! The exemption section on USDA regulated products is a dust up. Most people think the USDA has authority over live food animals, but it is the FDA after all. They surrender "cow, sheep or goat for milk production", but the FDA retains authority of the fluid milk and when the animal is no longer productive for milking, it's into the slaughter channel (under USDA) or out to pasture (back to FDA) anyway!

"Livestock and poultry that are intended to be presented for slaughter pursuant to the regulations by the Secretary of Agriculture under the Federal Meat Inspection Act or the Poultry Products Inspection Act are exempt from the requirements of this Act. A cow, sheep, or goat that is used for the production of milk is exempt from the requirements of this Act." (p.5 of HR2749)

HR 2749 is 160 pages (July 29 version) and contains the following references to international standards and guidelines (emphasis added for clarity) (all page numbers refer to the PDF file):

"(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." (p. 35)

"CONSISTENCY WITH INTERNATIONAL OBLIGATIONS.—The Secretary shall apply this paragraph consistently with United States obligations under international agreements." (p. 81)

"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." (p. 82)

This means 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 (read NAIS) 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 HR 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." (p. 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 describes specific components of NAIS 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"] (p. 70)


"……use a unique identifier for each facility owned or operated by such person for such purpose…" (p. 69)

So we have PIN (Premises Identification Number) 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." (p. 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 (GAP) are not a standard in and of themselves. They are a combination of standards and guidelines set forth by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the U.N. (FAO), through both the OIE (World Animal Health Organization) and Codex Alimentarius (Food Code) and IPPC 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 and 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) Premises 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 by way of 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 meets 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 This is "the" certifying methodology for international trade in ag products. Here are a few excerpts from their 122-page general regulations booklet that 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 often 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 animal. 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.’ (pp. 74-75)

So being exempt means you are required to keep records. Keeping required records means you could be required to release those records. So how exempt can a person get under this legislation? Especially when the slughter facilities will all be regulated unless the USDA already regulates them?

Then of course, as with any law, there are the fines and penalties. These are from $20,000 to $1,000,000 per violation. (p. 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""…… (p. 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. This bill opens a huge regulatory nightmare that is only evident when one knows what the international guidelines and standards consist of in regard to agriculture. Understanding those, it is highly unlikely that they will issue regulations that keep things as they are now.

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 so-called “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. ===end===

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.

Tuesday, July 21, 2009

HR 2749 and some of the problems with it

On today's radio show, despite all the ridiculous technical problems, Marti Oakley got through a lot of HR 2749, and we touched on a few other pet peeves in the process. this bill is slated to be on the floor of Congress this week! Call your Congressman and let them know they must vote against it, or face peril.....Or something like that.

Here are some links important in understanding this legislation.....from Marti!

USDA defines “What is a farm” and goes on to define who is the operator and

The FDA defines what a farm is. Use the forward and backward buttons to view all definitions.

US code 21 ….(6) Manufacturing/processing means making food from one or more ingredients, or synthesizing, preparing, treating, modifying or manipulating food, including food crops or ingredients. Examples of manufacturing/processing activities are cutting, peeling, trimming, washing, waxing, eviscerating, rendering, cooking, baking, freezing, cooling, pasteurizing, homogenizing, mixing, formulating, bottling, milling, grinding, extracting juice, distilling, labeling, or packaging.

The above excerpt language is reflected in every bill presented and expanded to include EVERY person, or entity of any kind or size that engages in any of these activities. The only exception under HR 2749 is IF you plant, grow and harvest then process and consume the food yourself. IF you purchase ANY ingredient from any other source of any kind whatsoever…….you must register your property, pay the 500 fee and submit to FDA intrusion.

Report on the dysfunction of FDA……subcommittee

A PR website that promotes cloning rather than biodiversity.

An article on FDA approving cloned meat and milk without adequate studies.

This is a must read site for finding out who is behind the push to pass all these unconstitutional laws and implementing full compliance with Codex. BIO is the association of bio-piracy companies around the world who work to revise laws and international regulations to suit corporate needs. If you wonder how congress comes up with the invasive and oppressive language and intent of legislation meant to usurp US laws and constitutional rights…..these are the people who orchestrate all of it. Codex is simply a corporate agenda operating under the guise of humanitarian efforts and fully supported by the UN

Current code that would be wiped out if Codex is passed thru HR 2749

Thursday, May 21, 2009

Where is their Bail Out?


A Letter from A Dodge Dealer Who Lost His Franchise

Gary North

May 20, 2009
So after taking a bunch of your money, GM is now shutting down 2,600 franchises. The harsh realities of this act are revealed in the following letter...When things become "too big to fail", they evidently now must be propped up as an image at the cost of real misery for real people. Meanwhile, the shill press says "the economy is getting better!" What a load of blather.

My name is George C. Joseph. I am the sole owner of Sunshine Dodge-Isuzu, a family owned and operated business in Melbourne, Florida. My family bought and paid for this automobile franchise 35 years ago in 1974. I am the second generation to manage this business.

We currently employ 50+ people and before the economic slowdown we employed over 70 local people. We are active in the community and the local chamber of commerce. We deal with several dozen local vendors on a day to day basis and many more during a month. All depend on our business for part of their livelihood. We are financially strong with great respect in the market place and community. We have strong local presence and stability.

I work every day the store is open, nine to ten hours a day. I know most of our customers and all our employees. Sunshine Dodge is my life.

On Thursday, May 14, 2009 I was notified that my Dodge franchise, that we purchased, will be taken away from my family on June 9, 2009 without compensation and given to another dealer at no cost to them. My new vehicle inventory consists of 125 vehicles with a financed balance of 3 million dollars. This inventory becomes impossible to sell with no factory incentives beyond June 9, 2009. Without the Dodge franchise we can no longer sell a new Dodge as "new," nor will we be able to do any warranty service work. Additionally, my Dodge parts inventory, (approximately $300,000.) is virtually worthless without the ability to perform warranty service. There is no offer from Chrysler to buy back the vehicles or parts inventory.

Our facility was recently totally renovated at Chrysler's insistence, incurring a multi-million dollar debt in the form of a mortgage at Sun Trust Bank.



This is beyond imagination! My business is being stolen from me through NO FAULT OF OUR OWN. We did NOTHING wrong.

This atrocity will most likely force my family into bankruptcy. This will also cause our 50+ employees to be unemployed. How will they provide for their families? This is a total economic disaster.


I beseech your help, and look forward to your reply. Thank you.


George C. Joseph
President & Owner
Sunshine Dodge-Isuzu

Tuesday, May 5, 2009

DHS Defintions of Radicalized Americans

Domestic Extremism Lexicon

26 March 2009

[Note: This is extracted from a pdf that I received from Michael Edward at YRIITL.The format is different, but the verbiage is unchanged. With the recent MIAC brouhaha here in Missouri and now this, it would appear that if you’re an American and you’re breathing, you’d probably find yourself rating some special attention from the powers that be.]

(U) Prepared by the Strategic Analysis Group and the Extremism and Radicalization Branch, Homeland Environment Threat Analysis Division.

(U//FOUO) Homeland Security Reference Aids—prepared by the DHS/Office of Intelligence and Analysis (I&A)—provide baseline information on a variety of homeland security issues. This product is one in a series of reference aids designed to provide operational and intelligence advice and assistance to other elements of DHS, as well as state, local, and regional fusions centers. DHS/I&A intends this background information to assist federal, state, local, and tribal homeland security and law enforcement officials in conducting analytic activities. This product provides definitions for key terms and phrases that often appear in DHS analysis that addresses the nature and scope of the threat that domestic, non-Islamic extremism poses to the United States. Definitions were derived from a variety of open source materials and unclassified information, then further developed during facilitated workshops with DHS intelligence analysts knowledgeable about domestic, non-Islamic extremism in the United States.


(U) Warning: This document is UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY (U//FOUO). It contains information that may be exempt from public release under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). It is to be controlled, stored, handled, transmitted, distributed, and disposed of in accordance with DHS policy relating to FOUO information and is not to be released to the public, the media, or other personnel who do not have a valid need-to-know without prior approval of an authorized DHS official. State and local homeland security officials may share this document with authorized security personnel without further approval from DHS.

(U) This product contains U.S. person information that has been deemed necessary for the intended recipient to understand, assess, or act on the information provided. It has been highlighted in this document with the label USPER and should be handled in accordance with the recipient's intelligence oversight or information handling procedures.

(U) Definitions

(U) aboveground (U//FOUO) A term used to describe extremist groups or individuals who operate overtly and portray themselves as law-abiding.

(U) alternative media (U//FOUO) A term used to describe various information sources that provide a forum for interpretations of events and issues that differ radically from those presented in mass media products and outlets.

(U) anarchist extremism (U//FOUO) A movement of groups or individuals who advocate a society devoid of government structure or ownership of individual property. Many embrace some of the radical philosophical components of anticapitalist, antiglobalization, communist, socialist, and other movements. Anarchist extremists advocate changing government and society through revolutionary violence. (also: revolutionary anarchists)

(U) animal rights extremism (U//FOUO) A movement of groups or individuals who ascribe equal value to all living organisms and seek to end the perceived abuse and suffering of animals. They believe animals are sentient creatures that experience emotional, physical, and mental awareness and deserve many of the same rights as human beings; for example, the right to life and freedom to engage in normal, instinctive animal behavior. These groups have been known to advocate or engage in criminal activity and plot acts of violence and terrorism in an attempt to advance their extremist goals. They have targeted industries, businesses, and government entities that they perceive abuse or exploit animals, including those that use animals for testing, human services, food production, or consumption. (also: animal liberation)

(U) antiabortion extremism (U//FOUO) A movement of groups or individuals who are virulently antiabortion and advocate violence against providers of abortion-related services, their employees, and their facilities. Some cite various racist and anti-Semitic beliefs to justify their criminal activities.

(U) anti-immigration extremism (U//FOUO) A movement of groups or individuals who are vehemently opposed to illegal immigration, particularly along the U.S. southwest border with Mexico, and who have been known to advocate or engage in criminal activity and plot acts of violence and terrorism to advance their extremist goals. They are highly critical of the U.S. Government’s response to illegal immigration and oppose government programs that are designed to extend “rights” to illegal aliens, such as issuing driver’s licenses or national identification cards and providing in-state tuition, medical benefits, or public education.

(U) antitechnology extremism (U//FOUO) A movement of groups or individuals opposed to technology. These groups have been known to advocate or engage in criminal activity and plot acts of violence and terrorism in an attempt to advance their extremist goals. They have targeted college and university laboratories, scholars, biotechnology industries, U.S. corporations involved in the computer or airline industry, and others. (also: Neo-Luddites)

(U) Aryan prison gangs (U//FOUO) Individuals who form organized groups while in prison and advocate white supremacist views. Group members may continue to operate under the auspices of the prison gang upon their release from correctional facilities.

(U) black bloc (U//FOUO) An organized collection of violent anarchists and anarchist affinity groups that band together for illegal acts of civil disturbance and use tactics that destroy property or strain law enforcement resources. Black blocs operate in autonomous cells that infiltrate nonviolent protests, often without the knowledge of the organizers of the event.

(U) black nationalism (U//FOUO) A term used by black separatists to promote the unification and separate identity of persons of black or African American descent and who advocate the establishment of a separate nation within the United States.

(U) black power (U//FOUO) A term used by black separatists to describe their pride in and the perceived superiority of the black race.

(U) black separatism (U//FOUO) A movement of groups or individuals of black or African American descent who advocate the separation of the races or the separation of specific geographic regions from the rest of the United States; some advocate forming their own political system within a separate nation. Such groups or individuals also may embrace radical religious beliefs. Members have been known to advocate or engage in criminal activity and plot acts of violence directed toward local law enforcement in an attempt to advance their extremist goals.

(U) Christian Identity (U//FOUO) A racist religious philosophy that maintains non-Jewish whites are “God’s Chosen People” and the true descendants of the Twelve Tribes of Israel. Groups or individuals can be followers of either the Covenant or Dual Seedline doctrine; all believe that Jews are conspiring with Satan to control world affairs and that the world is on the verge of the Biblical apocalypse. Dual Seedline adherents believe Jews are the literal offspring of Satan and that nonwhites, who are often referred to as “mud people,” are not human beings. (also: Identity, CI, Anglo-Israel)

(U) Cuban independence extremism (U//FOUO) A movement of groups or individuals who do not recognize the legitimacy of the Communist Cuban Government and who attempt to subvert it through acts of violence, mainly within the United States. (also: anti-Castro groups)

(U) decentralized terrorist movement (U//FOUO) A movement of groups or individuals who pursue shared ideological goals through tactics of leaderless resistance independent of any larger terrorist organization.

(U) denial-of-service attack (U//FOUO) An attack that attempts to prevent or impair the intended functionality of computer networks, systems, or applications. Depending on the type of system targeted, the attack can employ a variety of mechanisms and means. (also: DoS attack)

(U) direct action (U//FOUO) Lawful or unlawful acts of civil disobedience ranging from protests to property destruction or acts of violence. This term is most often used by single-issue or anarchist extremists to describe their activities.

(U) environmental extremism (U//FOUO) A movement of groups or individuals who use violence to end what they perceive as the degradation of the natural environment by humans. Members have advocated or engaged in criminal activity and plot acts of violence and terrorism in an attempt to advance their extremist goals. They target industries, businesses, and government entities that they allege are engaged in habitat destruction, citing urban sprawl and development, logging, construction sites and related equipment, and man-made sources of air, water, and land pollution. (also: ecoterrorism)

(U) ethnic-based extremism (U//FOUO) A movement of groups or individuals who are drawn together and form extremist beliefs based on their ethnic or cultural background. Members have advocated or engaged in criminal activity and have plotted acts of violence and terrorism in an attempt to advance their extremist goals.

(U) extremist group (U//FOUO) An ideologically driven organization that advocates or attempts to bring about political, religious, economic, or social change through the use of force, violence, or ideologically motivated criminal activity.

(U) green anarchism (U//FOUO) A movement of groups or individuals who combine anarchist ideology with an environmental focus. They advocate a return to a preindustrial, agrarian society, often through acts of violence and terrorism.

(U) hacktivism (U//FOUO) (A portmanteau of “hacking” and “activism.”) The use of cyber technologies to achieve a political end, or technology-enabled political or social activism. Hacktivism might include website defacements, denial-of-service attacks, hacking into the target’s network to introduce malicious software (malware), or information theft.

(U) hate groups (U//FOUO) A term most often used to describe white supremacist groups. It is occasionally used to describe other racist extremist groups.

(U) Jewish extremism (U//FOUO) A movement of groups or individuals of the Jewish faith who are willing to use violence or commit other criminal acts to protect themselves against perceived affronts to their religious or ethnic identity.

(U) leaderless resistance (U//FOUO) A strategy that stresses the importance of individuals and small cells acting independently and anonymously outside formalized organizational structures to enhance operational security and avoid detection. It is used by many types of domestic extremists.

(U) leftwing extremism (U//FOUO) A movement of groups or individuals that embraces anticapitalist, Communist, or Socialist doctrines and seeks to bring about change through violent revolution rather than through established political processes. The term also refers to leftwing, single-issue extremist movements that are dedicated to causes such as environmentalism, opposition to war, and the rights of animals. (also: far left, extreme left)

(U) lone terrorist (U//FOUO) An individual motivated by extremist ideology to commit acts of criminal violence independent of any larger terrorist organization. (also: lone wolf)

(U) Mexican separatism (U//FOUO) A movement of groups or individuals of Mexican descent who advocate the secession of southwestern U.S. states (all or part of Arizona, California, New Mexico, and Texas) to join with Mexico through armed struggle. Members do not recognize the legitimacy of these U.S. states, including the U.S. Government’s original acquisition of these territories.

(U) militia movement (U//FOUO) A rightwing extremist movement composed of groups or individuals who adhere to an antigovernment ideology often incorporating various conspiracy theories. Members oppose most federal and state laws, regulations, and authority (particularly firearms laws and regulations) and often conduct paramilitary training designed to resist perceived government interference in their activities or to overthrow the U.S. Government through the use of violence. (also: citizens militia, unorganized militia)

(U) neo-Nazis (U//FOUO) Groups or individuals who adhere to and promote Adolph Hitler’s beliefs and use Nazi symbols and ideology. Subjects subscribe to virulently racist as well as anti-Semitic beliefs, many based on national socialist ideals derived from Nazi Germany. Neo-Nazis may attempt to downplay or deny the Jewish Holocaust. (also: national socialists, Nazis)

(U) patriot movement (U//FOUO) A term used by rightwing extremists to link their beliefs to those commonly associated with the American Revolution. The patriot movement primarily comprises violent antigovernment groups such as militias and sovereign citizens. (also: Christian patriots, patriot group, Constitutionalists, Constitutionist)

(U) Phineas Priesthood (U//FOUO) A Christian Identity doctrine derived from the Biblical story of Phineas, which adherents interpret as justifying inter-racial killing. Followers of this belief system also have advocated martyrdom and violence against homosexuals, mixed-race couples, and abortion providers.

(U) primary targeting (U//FOUO) Plans or attacks directed by extremists against parties that are the focus of an organized campaign.

(U) Puerto Rican independence extremists (U//FOUO) Groups or individuals who engage in criminal activity and advocate the use of violence to achieve Puerto Rican independence from the United States.

(U) racial Nordic mysticism (U//FOUO) An ideology adopted by many white supremacist prison gangs who embrace a Norse mythological religion, such as Odinism or Asatru. (also: Odinism, Asatru)

(U) racialist (U//FOUO) A term used by white supremacists intended to minimize their extreme views on racial issues.

(U) racist skinheads (U//FOUO) Groups or individuals who combine white supremacist ideology with a skinhead ethos in which “white power” music plays a central role. Dress may include a shaved head or very short hair, jeans, thin suspenders, combat boots or Doc Martens, a bomber jacket (sometimes with racist symbols), and tattoos of Nazi-like emblems. Some are abandoning these stereotypical identifiers. (also: skins)

(U) radicalization (U//FOUO) The process by which an individual adopts an extremist belief system leading to his or her willingness to advocate or bring about political, religious, economic, or social change through the use of force, violence, or ideologically motivated criminal activity.

(U) rightwing extremism (U//FOUO) A movement of rightwing groups or individuals who can be broadly divided into those who are primarily hate-oriented, and those who are mainly antigovernment and reject federal authority in favor of state or local authority. This term also may refer to rightwing extremist movements that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration. (also known as far right, extreme right)

(U) secondary targeting (U//FOUO) Plans or attacks directed against parties (secondary targets) that provide direct financial, logistic, or physical support to the primary target of an organized campaign, with the goal of coercing those parties to end their engagement with a primary target. Secondary targets can include customers of or suppliers to a primary target or employees of a primary target organization.

(U) single-issue extremist groups (U//FOUO) Groups or individuals who focus on a single issue or cause—such as animal rights, environmental or anti-abortion extremism—and often employ criminal acts. Group members may be associated with more than one issue. (also: special interest extremists)

(U) skinheads (U//FOUO) A subculture composed primarily of working-class, white youth who embrace shaved heads for males, substance abuse, and violence. Skinheads can be categorized as racist, anti-racist or “traditional,” which emphasizes group unity based on fashion, music, and lifestyle rather than political ideology. Dress often includes a shaved head or very short hair, jeans, thin suspenders, combat boots or Doc Martens, and a bomber jacket. (also: skins)

(U) sovereign citizen movement (U//FOUO) A rightwing extremist movement composed of groups or individuals who reject the notion of U.S. citizenship. They claim to follow only what they believe to be God’s law or common law and the original 10 amendments (Bill of Rights) to the U.S. Constitution. They believe they are emancipated from all other responsibilities associated with being a U.S. citizen, such as paying taxes, possessing a driver’s license and motor vehicle registration, or holding a social security number. They generally do not recognize federal or state government authority or laws. Several sovereign citizen groups in the United States produce fraudulent documents for their members in lieu of legitimate government-issued forms of identification. Members have been known to advocate or engage in criminal activity and plot acts of violence and terrorism in an attempt to advance their extremist goals. They often target government officials and law enforcement. (also: state citizens, freemen, preamble citizens, common law citizens)

(U) tax resistance movement (U//FOUO) Groups or individuals who vehemently believe taxes violate their constitutional rights. Among their beliefs are that wages are not income, that paying income taxes is voluntary, and that the 16th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which allowed Congress to levy taxes on income, was not properly ratified. Members have been known to advocate or engage in criminal activity and plot acts of violence and terrorism in an attempt to advance their extremist goals. They often target government entities such as the Internal Revenue Service and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. (also: tax protest movement, tax freedom movement, antitax movement)

(U) tertiary targeting (U//FOUO) Plans or attacks against parties with indirect links to the primary target of an organized campaign. Tertiary targets can include employees, customers, investors, and other participants in a company (the secondary target) that does business with or provides support services to the primary target; or parties who provide direct financial, logistic, or physical support to the secondary target.

(U) underground (U//FOUO) A term used to describe clandestine extremist groups, individuals, or their activities.

(U) violent antiwar extremism (U//FOUO) A movement of groups or individuals who advocate or engage in criminal activity and plot acts of violence and terrorism in an attempt to voice their opposition to U.S. involvement in war-related activities. They often target the military, seats of government power, and defense industry personnel, facilities, and activities.

(U) violent religious sects (U//FOUO) Religious extremist groups predisposed toward violence. These groups often stockpile weapons, conduct paramilitary training, and share a paranoid interpretation of current world events, which they often associate with the end of the world. They perceive outsiders as enemies or evil influences; display intense xenophobia and strong distrust of the government; and exercise extreme physical or psychological control over group members, sometimes isolating them from society or subjecting them to physical or sexual abuse and harsh initiation practices.

(U) white nationalism (U//FOUO) A term used by white supremacists to emphasize what they perceive as the uniquely white (European) heritage of the United States.

(U) white power (U//FOUO) A term used by white supremacists to describe their pride in and the perceived superiority of the white race.

(U) white separatism (U//FOUO) A movement of groups or individuals who believe in the separation of races and reject interracial marriages. Some advocate the secession of specific geographic regions from the rest of the United States. Members have been known to advocate or engage in criminal activity and plot acts of violence and terrorism in an attempt to advance their extremist goals.

(U) white supremacist movement (U//FOUO) Groups or individuals who believe that whites—Caucasians—are intellectually and morally superior to other races and use their racist ideology to justify committing crimes, acts of violence, and terrorism to advance their cause. Some advocate racial separation/segregation. White supremacists generally fall into six categories: Neo-Nazi, Ku Klux KlanUSPER, Christian Identity, racist skinhead, Nordic mysticism, or Aryan prison gangs. White supremacists have been known to embrace more than one of these categories.

(U) Reporting Notice:

(U) DHS encourages recipients of this document to report information concerning suspicious or criminal activity to DHS and the FBI. The DHS National Operations Center (NOC) can be reached by telephone at 202-282-9685 or by e-mail at For information affecting the private sector and critical infrastructure, contact the National Infrastructure Coordinating Center (NICC), a sub-element of the NOC. The NICC can be reached by telephone at 202-282-9201 or by e-mail at The FBI regional phone numbers can be found online at When available, each report submitted should include the date, time, location, type of activity, number of people and type of equipment used for the activity, the name of the submitting company or organization, and a designated point of contact.

(U) For comments or questions related to the content or dissemination of this document, please contact the DHS/I&A Production Branch at,, or

(U) Tracked by: TERR-020100-01-05, TERR-020600-01-05, TERR-060100-01-05