Truth Farmer

Let Them Eat Grass.....

2010-12-17T14:31:00.000-08:00

I've moved the blog to a wordpress site. There seems to be a little more ease of using applications there and I can upload documents, so....please go check out my new article, which will be on News With Views and is on Liberty News Radio, at Truth Farmer, the new site! Granted, O have to figure some things out yet, but I think it will be more user friendly to some degree.

Be blessed!

Doreen

How the Cow Ate the Cabbage

2010-12-09T19:33:00.000-08:00

Morningland Dairy Gets Ready to Go to Court—

And the Cow Eats the Cabbage!

December 9th, 2010
©Doreen Hannes

As many have been watching Senate Bill 510 for the past several weeks, going from hither to yon with much angst amongst the various food activist groups regarding the ability of the Tester Amendment to ‘help’ (or NOT) independent agriculture, other things have been going on in the real food arena. Morningland Dairy, for instance, has entered the next phase of their fight to be able to continue to make cheese that the FDA thinks “poses an acute and life threatening danger” because it is made from raw milk, and hasn’t had a single report of illness associated with the dairy in 30 years of production. (You can read more about it here)

Morningland is charged with three violations by the Missouri Attorney General’s office on behalf of the Missouri Milk Board. They are charged with, “Unlawful Sale of Dairy Products”, “Failure to Comply with a Destruction Order”, and “Unlawful Interference with Milk Board Duties”. The Missouri Milk Board claims that there is no procedure in place to appeal the decision of the Milk Board, and that belief is actually responsible for all three charges levied against Morningland Dairy, since they haven’t made or sold any of their cheese since the Milk Board first placed an embargo on their product on August 26th.

Last week the State of Missouri brought in their first expert for a deposition. This was John Frank, who reportedly was to demonstrate that Morningland Dairy’s cheese should all be condemned because it is a single line production facility. It’s my understanding that his deposition didn’t actually prove that to be the conclusion a reasonable person would arrive at when considering the evidence in the case.

Next, the State desires to depose the principals Of Morningland Dairy. Those being Joseph and Denise Dixon, co-owners and General Managers of Morningland Dairy, and Jedadiah York, the Plant Manger. Mr. York and Mrs. Dixon are readily available for deposition, but Morningland’s attorney, Gary Cox, of Farm to Consumer Legal Defense Fund wants to be present at their depositions to be able to assert proper procedure in defense of his clients. He is only able to be present for a few days in December and early January, and the Missouri Attorney General’s office isn’t pleased with such limited access to the objects of their affection....so they have requested that the counsel sponsoring Cox into Missouri take the position of defending Morningland in their depositions.

The Missouri Attorney General’s office is going to have a bit more difficulty in getting a deposition from Joseph Dixon in this suit. As if having to dump their milk for nearly six weeks wasn’t enough, the Missouri Milk Board has prohibited Morningland from resuming production to keep this family run farmstead cheese plant providing for the families dependent upon it for their livelihood. Mr. Dixon insisted that their counsel inform the Attorney General’s office that he was unavailable for deposition in the following manner:

“Unfortunately, Joe Dixon is not available for deposition. Since the state has put his family’s cheese making business out of business Joe has to work out of state to support his family. This week Joe is working in Maryland, next week he is working in Alabama and the week after that I understand he is working in Florida. To give you an idea of what the state has done to the Dixon family, Joe has to leave his family on the weekend, travel all night to get to his place of work, then work all week before returning home on the weekend. He then leaves home again, let’s say for Maryland, and drives all night to get to his place of work. Thus, Joe is not available for depositions unless you wish to travel to Maryland, Alabama or to Florida after first serving him with a subpoena. Moreover, Joe finds it perverse that he has to work to support his family and then the state collects taxes from him so that those tax dollars can be used by the state to harass he and his family and deprive them of a livelihood. Finally, any information you would need from Joe would be available from Denise.” (emphasis added-otherwise sic)

In the Deep South, there’s a colloquialism that is used to sum this kind of statement up... With the actions of the Congress and the agencies they empower, it sure looks like many more of us will have the opportunity to use this expression...”And that’s how the cow ate the cabbage!”

(The Howell County Circuit Court has set January 11th and 12th as the initial dates for this court case. The outcome of this case is terrifically important for food freedom advocates and anyone who thinks they have the right to decide what they wish to eat. Please support Morningland Dairy as they strive to set precedent that in this country you DO have the right to have redress on an agency decision. Morningland is asking for a jury trial.)

They've Rolled 510 into the Funding...

2010-12-08T10:32:00.000-08:00

Food Safety Bill Shenanigans from Campaign for Liberty.....and confirmed.

Posted by Tim Shoemaker on 12/08/10 12:19 PM
Last updated 12/08/10 12:35 PM

The Bill Number is HR 3082, and it is 423 pages, you can find it here....maybe today only.

Sources on the Hill have informed us the Food Safety Bill was folded into the House Continuing Resolution, which authorizes the funding of government into 2011.

As you may remember, the Food Safety Act was "blue slipped" by the House Democrats, after the Senate passed it, because Harry Reid included a section that raised taxes (which the Constitution requires to begin in the House).

Additionally, the House will consider Rep. Slaughter's "Martial Law / Same Day Authority Rule through Dec. 18" H. Res. 1752, which will allow the Democratic majority to bring bills up with almost no notice through Dec. 18.

This is nothing more than an attempt to keep the American people in the dark and prevent them from mobilizing in opposition to their statist power grabs.

Contact your Congressman today and tell them to take the Food Safety language out of the Continuing Resolution and to oppose H. Res. 1752, which would allow the Democrats to ram through their statist agenda with little transparency.

One method to use....but CALL often!!!

RalphFucetolaJD
Newton, NJ http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/568/t/0/blastContent.jsp?email_blast_KEY=12 00289

S.510: Hidden in House Amendment to Senate Amendment to House Bill! HR 3082 now hides S 510! Well, It's Not Hidden From US! Take These 3 Steps NOW to Protect Food Freedom

1. Take Action NOW for each member of your household to tell your Representatives that you STONGLY OPPOSE adopting the language of S. 510 in this or any other amendment or bill:

http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/568/p/dia/action/public/?action_KE Y=5303

2. Visit http://www.congress.org/congressorg/directory/congdir.tt, enter your zip code to find your Representative's name and phone number. CALL IT! Yes, the line may be busy. Keep trying. Give the person who answers this message:

"I am calling to strongly opposed adopting the language of S. 510, the so-called Food Safety Modernization Act. This language is currently attached to 'CR/Food Safety House Amendment to the Senate Amendment to H.R. 3082 - Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011/FDA Food Safety Modernization Act'. I urge Representative [name] in the strongest possible terms to vote against this amendment and to oppose this language in any bill or amendment."

The phone lines may be busy. Keep trying. This is literally an 11th hour attempt by Big Agribiz to control every bite you eat, and make sure it is to their liking, not yours.

3. Using Social Media like Facebook and Twitter, using your phone lists and your email contacts, get the word out, urging everyone you can contact to do the same:

1. Take the Action Item

http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/568/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY =5303

2. Call the House of Representatives to deliver the message above

http://www.congress.org/congressorg/directory/congdir.tt

3. Take the message viral to THEIR contact and so on....post and cross post, please.

We're from the Government, and We're Here to Help you

2010-12-04T09:44:00.000-08:00

America’s Done---Stick a Fork In Her!
S. 510 Hits a Snag, But Be Wary
©Doreen Hannes 2010

Senate Bill S 510, the Food Safety Modernization Act, passed the Senate on November 30th, 74-23. Not a single Democrat crossed party lines. This bill is the coup on food in the US. Even though the Tester Amendment was included to dupe those who think it will stop small farmers and processors from being put right out of business, it will only slow down the demise of some small farms.

Then it came to light that a Constitutional issue that had been staring all of us in the face was present. The Senate did not pick up HR2749, which passed the House in July of 2009; instead they took up their own monster in S 510. They also began revenue generation in the Senate (Section 107 of the bill), which is expressly forbidden by the Constitution.

Faced with a patently un-Constitutional bill, that violates Constitutional process, we have to remain vigilant until BOTH houses have adjourned for the winter recess prior to the next session of Congress. Talk about roller coasters.

If the Constitution means anything at all, the House should “blue slip” S. 510, which would preclude them from taking the bill up and very likely run out the clock for passage in this session.

However, there are four choices available for the legislation to move forward before they adjourn on December 24th. The first is for the Senate to bring it back and get unanimous consent to remove the offending section. Since Senator Coburn of Oklahoma will not consent, that avenue is cut off.

Second is for the Senate to bust S. 510 down to the original “compromise” amendment, remove the funding section and the Tester amendment and try to ram it through the entire senate process again before the 24th. This seems unlikely, but don’t trust them as far as you can throw a semi trailer loaded with lead.

Third, the Senate could take HR2749, which has already passed the House, and rush it through the Senate, and it would go straight to the President’s desk with no process with the House necessary. This also seems rather unlikely. The bills are very similar and would have the same detrimental effects for everyone, but the Senators are not familiar with the bill, so it could be really tough.

Fourth, the House Ways and Means committee could pass the bill through and forgive the Constitutional infraction and refuse to blue slip the bill, then vote on it before the 24th and we’d have the bill albeit there would be legal issues brought forth that could possibly ensnare the regulations they want to write under this bill. This appears to be the most likely potential for S. 510.

Make no mistake about this, SB 510, or HR 2749 are worse than the Patriot Act, the Health Care bill, and the Federal Reserve Act combined. We can all live without little pieces of paper, and many of us can live without doctors, and we have been living with the increasing police state since 911, but none of us can live without food and water. If we lose food and water, we won’t be able to fight anything else.

The Tester-Hagan Amendment—Lipstick on a Pig

The largest deception played on the public in S. 510 is the inclusion of the Tester Amendment. This amendment was sold as the complete exemption for all small farms grossing less than $500,000 per year. But if one reads the actual amendment, it is evident that it will not do what it is purported to do for the vast majority of small producers.

The Tester Amendment has strident restrictions on those who may be “exempted” from HACCP (Hazard and Critical Control Point) implementations. HACCP is 50 pages of instructions that require a certifier to sign off on the plan, and a team to be trained in ensuring the plan is followed on the farm. The requirement of this plan put about 40% of small meat processors out of business several years ago. If you fall under the “protection” of the Tester amendment, you won’t have to do it....but let’s see how protective the Tester Amendment really is.

First, the Tester Amendment purports to exempt farms with less than $500,000 in sales from the requirements of S.510. However, to be “exempt” one must sell more than 50% of their products directly to consumers or restaurants within a 275-mile radius from production, and keep records substantiating those sales. The records are open for inspection and verification of the exemption. In other words, you have to prove you are playing by their rules through record keeping and approval of those records, or meet the more onerous requirements of S.510.

You must “apply” to be included in the “protections” of the Tester amendment. You must substantiate through your records for three years that you fit the category of selling more than “50% of average annual monetary value” within this 275-mile radius. So, if you sell on the roadside or at a farmers market, you must have a map handy and ask for ID from everyone who purchases from you or lose your exemption. Nice, huh?

Proof of Residence for Food? Really?

I can see it now....A lovely early June day, with the birds singing and the smell of freshly mown hay hanging in the air like the best memory from childhood. A young mother pulls into the Farmers Market and readies herself for a wonderful shopping experience.

She approaches the first stand with her mouth nearly watering at the bright display of fresh produce. “I’d like 3 cucumbers, please”, says the lady with her 3 kids and cloth grocery bag.

“Great! Can I see your ID?” replies the guy in bibs.

“Oh, I’m paying with cash” she replies with a smile.

“No matter”, says the farmer, “We have to make sure you’re within a 275 mile radius of our farm in order to sell to you”.

She looks perplexed and says, “Well, we aren’t. We’re on our way to visit my parents and I wanted to make a special dinner for all of us, using their locally produced foods so they could remember how good home grown veggies are....So I can’t buy from you without an ID?”

The farmer scratches his head and says, “Now see, I have to be very careful. I belong to a CSA that sells to a Chipotle that’s 276 miles from us, so all of my sales at market have to be local or I lose my exemption and will have to hire 5 people to take care of the paper work and then I just go out of business. So no, I can’t sell to you. What’s more, all the vendors here are part of the CSA, so no one here can sell to you. You have a nice day now!”

No Surprises-It’s Locally Global

What we have in Tester is local Agenda 21 Sustainable Development. In sum, “control over all human impact on the environment”. Everything will need to be within the ‘food shed’, and if you are outside of the food shed, too bad for you. It’s a great way to surveille and monitor food production and distribution. And you still fall under the broad based “reason to believe” of the Secretary with the Tester amendment. If the “Secretary”, meaning the head of the FDA or HHS thinks you may have a problem, or deems what you produce to be ‘high risk’, you will be shut down until they say you can begin again. All of your product is subject to mandatory recall; that’s why you have to keep records of everyone you sell to. And you will have to register as a facility under the Bioterrorism Act of 2002, referred to as Sec 415 throughout the bill. (Knock knock---this is “premises identification” as in NAIS)

So please, don’t tell me how great the Tester Amendment is, and that the expansive powers being granted to the DoD, DHS, HHS, FDA and USDA in this bill will be helpful to small farmers and local food production and make my food safe. Wake up and smell the coffee!!! Oh, wait. The only state that could produce coffee within 275 miles of itself, is Hawaii. Never mind. Wake up, and smell the tyranny, please.

(The best thing to do right now is to call the members of the House Ways and Means Committee as well as your own Representative and tell them they MUST blue slip S. 510. While I know it gets frustrating to call the Congress critters, the more they know that we know, the better the chance at slowing down the destruction they have planned for us. The switchboard number for Congress is 202-224-3121.)

What We Have to Look Forward to under S510

2010-11-30T19:37:00.000-08:00

The following article illustrates what will be happening at an ever more alarming rate with food as the Food Destruction Agency (FDA) receives more authority under Senate Bill 510 which passed today in a slam dunk fashion......These are real people with real lives, not some Hollywood screenplay. The destruction of livelihood has serious effects. Don't delude yourself. This can happen to you, too. Especially if you have products that actually are healthful. We cannot prosper under this regime.

Daniel Chapter One Bound and Gagged

By: Tricia Feijo

Source: Liberty News Radio

11/29/2010

We cannot believe that the Federal judges who ordered Daniel Chapter One to comply with the FTC Order have read it, let alone studied the case. The FTC Order is an egregious afront to our unalienable rights under God as protected by the U.S. Constitution.

The Order goes way beyond advertising/marketing, and infringes on our right to free speech in any realm. THIS IS HIGHLY UN-NATURAL. Imagine a friend asks a question of you, to which you have the answer, but you must say "I am not allowed to tell you." (What country are we in?!) The Lord gave us a healing ministry which we have devoted ourselves to for 27 years, and the U.S. Federal government has recently ordered us to stop.

Daniel Chapter One has never been charged with or found guilty of lying or harming anyone. We have helped thousands. All our information is true. The FTC does not contest that.

BUT THE FTC LIE, CHEAT, and STEAL! These are the facts:

1. LIES: The FTC made up statements and placed them in quotation marks, for example "7 Herb Formula cXXXX cXXXXX" (we are forbidden to use those last 2 words). Then they charged Daniel Chapter One with making the statements.

When we explained that we never said such a thing, the FTC said we "implied" it. All because of true testimonies, and structure/function information truthfully shared. (Jesus tells an account of a blind man healed after mud was applied to his eyes. The FTC would charge Jesus with implying "mud cures blindness." Come to think of it, they did order Jesus to stop.)

The FTC said in a legal brief to the judges that Daniel Chapter One had "11 witnesses testify" at the hearing. A bold lie. They blocked all but a few of the people who came to Washington DC to testify. After the first day declaring that Daniel Chapter One is indeed a ministry, besides Jim and Tricia, Daniel Chapter One had only 3 witnesses (ARN general manager and 2 experts).

The FTC said "all" Daniel Chapter One had to do was state that we had not done clinical trials on our products and use stronger disclaimers. Judge Ginsburg asked, "Is that all?" FTC lawyer Daly then replied, "it would be a start." Then that is not "all", is it. . .

2. CHEAT: The FTC design things so that they cannot lose, no matter how unjust. First they held a hearing in a mock-court, a Star Chamber, with FTC lawyers, an FTC judge, and FTC Commissioners.

The FTC held Daniel Chapter One dietary supplements to the FDA standard for chemical drugs, demanding double-blind placebo-controlled studies. This is an impossible obstacle, an unfair advantage they are fully aware of. One such study can cost $100 million dollars.

The FTC pretend that "reasonable consumers" think a dietary supplement has been put through such clinical trials. They protest testimonials, although there is NO LAW against true testimonials, nor is there any law saying that an herbal or nutritional supplement or food must go through double-blind placebo-controlled studies.

3. STEAL: Under the false pretense of protecting you, the FTC says that "consumers" cannot know the difference between placebo or a product that "really works". Thus they take it upon themselves to rob you of your right to information, your right to choice, your right to decide for yourself what you take in times of sickness and in health.

And with that the FTC and the Pharmaceutical companies are laughing all the way to the bank.

S 510 --- Call Senators!!!

2010-11-23T09:15:00.000-08:00

I realize everyone is likely sick of calling Congress and being ignored, but if we can move 10 Senators to halt S510, we will have defeated a major issue in establishing statute for international food control. Harry said last week, "We've got everything in place except for the Food Safety Act". Granted, he didn't say what "everything" he was referring to, but it's one of the last areas necessary to get statute for to enforce global standards in this nation....Please act. The economic effects of this bill will seriously harm independent agriculture.

Cloture Vote on S 510 Monday, November 29-

On Monday, November 29, a cloture vote on Senate Bill 510 will determine if the bill then goes immediately to the Senate floor for a final vote. Cloture requires 60 votes. If there are fewer than 60, the bill will not go forward. Let's make sure the cloture vote fails.

PLEASE CALL ALL THE SENATORS IN THE LIST LINKED BELOW AND ASK THEM TO OPPOSE CLOTURE AND OPPOSE S 510.

The votes of these "targeted" Senators could make all the difference. Even if they are not your Senators, please call them at their District Offices and, using the Talking Points below, ask them to oppose cloture and oppose S 510.

Why Senators Should Oppose S 510

S 510 threatens the existence of small, independent farms and will limit the food choices of consumers. As written - even with the proposed amendments - the bill is fundamentally flawed. S 510 will not improve food safety. Instead it will bury farmers in regulations and paperwork and consolidate agricultural production into fewer, larger industrial facilities.

The FDA has authority to inspect processing plants and imports, yet it inspects less than 1% of imports and less than 25% of the processing facilities it is authorized to. FDA claims it does not have the resources to carry out these inspections, yet it has the time and personnel to harass Amish farmers, raid food clubs, and pull over individuals who are transporting privately purchased fresh milk and make them dump it on the roadside.

S 510 would increase the cost of U.S. grown and produced food and extend the authority of international trade agreements onto small farms. Inspections and audits of farming and harvesting processes will cost farmers in upfront expenses just to exist. Even if they are not participating in direct or local sales, they will have to assume the audit and inspection costs as well as develop HACCP type plans. Larger corporations will not need to buy from domestic growers - they can import from countries with lower infrastructure costs to offset the expenses S 510 regulations will force on U.S. producers.

There are many reasons to oppose S510, but the fact that the FDA has stated in court that you have no right to consume any particular food, no right to bodily or physical health, and no right to contract is sufficient reason to not give it any more authority over your food than it already has.

Please call your Senators and the other Senators listed below and tell them you are smart enough to decide what you want to eat:

Talking Points
• S 510 will eliminate the only productive sector of our economy - small farms and local food. The Tester amendment still puts additional paperwork, record keeping and scrutiny onto direct marketers.
• The FDA fails to do the job it is charged with doing. Tell FDA to inspect the imports and the plants it has the authority to inspect and stay out of farming.
• The rules and regulations the FDA will promulgate under S510 will harm our ability to get food that we want to eat. Tell FDA instead to require truthful labeling and disclose genetically modified products on labels. This would create a safer food supply and not harm the small family farmer.
• S 510 will create even larger governmental bureaucracy, and the estimated costs don't include costs to individuals who actually produce food.
• S 510 opens the door to violations of due process including illegal search and seizure and suspension of judicial review.

ACTION:

Please call the Senators in this list - at their District offices - as well as you own two Senators, and tell them to oppose cloture and oppose S 510.

Lamar Alexander - cosponsor R-TN - 202-224-4944 (423) 752-5337 (731) 423-9344 (865) 545-4253 (901) 544-4224
Judd Gregg - co sponsor R-NH- 202-224-3324 (603) 225-7115 (603) 622-7979 (603) 431-2171 (603) 752-2604
Mike Johanns - didn't vote R-NE- 202-224-4224 (308) 236-7602 (402) 476-1400 (308) 632-6032 (402) 758-8981
Lisa Murkowski R-AK - 202-224-6665 907-456-0233 907-271-3735 907-376-7665 907-225-6880
David Vitter -cosponsor R-LA- 202-224-4623 (318) 448-0169 (318) 325-8120 (318) 861-0437 (504) 589-2753
George V. Voinovich R-OH- 202-224-3353 (216) 522-7095 (740) 441-6410 (513) 684-3265 (216) 522-7095
Scott Brown - not reliable R-MA- 202-224-4543 (617) 565-3170
Susan Collins R-ME- 202-224-2523 (207) 622-8414 (207) 945-0417 (207) 283-1101 (207) 493-7873
Olympia J. Snowe - up for reelection in 2012 R-ME- 202-224-5344 (207) 622-8292 (207) 945-0432 (207) 282-4144 (207) 874-0883
Jim Webb - up in 2012 D-VA- 202-224-4024 434-792-0976 757-518-1674 703-573-7090 804-771-2221
Jon Tester - up in 2012 D-MT- 202-224-2644 (406) 252-0550 (406) 586-4450 (406) 452-9585 (406) 723-3277
Ben Nelson D-NE- h202-224-6551 (402) 391-3411 (402) 441-4600 (308) 631-7614 (308) 293-5818
Herb Kohl D-WI- 202-224-5653 (715) 832-8424 (920) 738-1640 (414) 297-4451 (608) 264-5338
Bill Nelson cosponsor, switched from yea to nay, up for reelection 2012 D-FL 202-224-5274 407-872-7161 305-536-5999 813-225-7040 561-514-0189
Kent Conrad D-ND - 202-224-2043 (701) 852-0703 (701) 258-4648 (701) 775-9601 (701) 746-1990
Tom Carper D-DE- 202-224-2441 (302) 573-6291 (302) 674-3308 (302) 856-7690
Claire McCaskill D-MO - 202-224-6154 314-367-1364 816-421-1639 417-868-8745 573-442-7130
Robert P. Casey, Jr. - cosponsor D-PA 202-224-6324 (215) 405-9660 (412) 803-7370 (866) 461-9159 (814) 357-0314
Sherrod Brown D-OH -202-224-2315 (216) 522-7272 (513) 684-1021 (614) 469-2083 (440) 242-4100

Please join: National Independent Consumer and Farmers Association (NICFA), Campaign for Liberty (John Tate – President), Kristin Canty - Director of "Farmegeddon" the movie, and David Gumpert - author of "The Raw Milk Revolution" and www.TheCompletePatient.com, in OPPOSING cloture and OPPOSING S 510.

S 510 for Cloture

2010-11-17T05:55:00.000-08:00

Today's the Day...

As those who are aware in the food movement know, S 510 is up for a cloture vote today. Senator Coburn of Oklahoma has stated that he would filibuster on the bill. I hope he does, and I hope that other Senators give him support. In the 'politics as usual realm', Senator Coburn has come up with a amendment in the form of a substitute for 510. I read it late last night, and while it is better, it is still not good.

You can read the bill at Coburn's site, although I am uncertain that they will post the entire thing.

Here are the issues as I see them based upon a one time read through of the substitute...First off, he still allows the Secretary to operate off of a "reason to believe" instead of credible evidence. It can't surprise many that a "reason to believe" is not a sound basis to use to recall products or to shut down businesses. The FDA believes all raw dairy is inherently dangerous and may cause death. So will air or water if there is too much or too little of it, so....It's arbitrary, and allows too much room for abuse. You can't rule a nation off of 'feelings'.

Secondly, and this is my most recent pet peeve, this bill allows for "science-based" standards. Well whose science? And what is the basis? If you read studies, they usually come to the desired conclusion of the entity paying for the study, or 'science' in this case. It's completely open ended. If it were scientifically proven, or scientifically accurate, it would be less questionable as a criteria to be applied to food 'science'.

Thirdly, the substitute bill still mentions "good agricultural practices"....Insert a heavy sigh.

And finally, while I understand that the phrase regarding "nothing in this bill is to interfere with trade agreements under the WTO" applies to the scope of the legislation, with the three things I mentioned, 'reason to believe', science based, and 'good' agricultural practices, this is as dangerous as it is in the other versions of 510, 2749, 875, etc. If the three things I mentioned were changed in the substitute bill, it actually wouldn't be something I would work really hard against....but as it stands, I cannot support the substitute.

However, we must realize if ANYTHING passes out of the Senate under the guise of "food safety" it will be thrown into the sausage grinder with HR 2749 which passed the House last July and any gains made on less tyrannical verbiage in the Senate version will likely be entirely lost in Conference with the House version. So....the grinder turns, and those who want to avoid eating whatever Soylent Green pablum the FDA decides fits their 'science based' ideologies for 'food' need to continue to tell their Senators NO on any food safety bill.

This bill is worse than the Health Care Bill and the Financial Stabilization bill and everything else other than the Clean Water Restoration Act. We have to be able to eat and drink water to survive, going to the doctor is largely optional, and fiat scrip is fiat scrip no matter who issues it. Food and water have inherent and intrinsic value. We just can't live without it.

Call the Senate, please....202 224 3121.

Be blessed!

Can Properly Done Tests Clear Dairy to Sell?

2010-11-10T13:16:00.000-08:00

Missouri Milk Board Agrees to Allow Morningland Dairy to Test

11/10/10.... Morningland Dairy of Missouri, the farmstead cheese operation that has been shut down and under investigation by the FDA and Missouri Milk Board since August 26th finally obtained agreement from the Milk Board to properly test their cheese. Morningland, a farmstead raw cheese company, was shut down over concern by the Missouri Milk Board and the FDA that their cheese may harbor harmful bacteria.

On Monday November 8th, Morningland Dairy attorney Gary Cox, of Farm to Consumer Legal Defense Fund, informed Morningland that an agreement had been reached with the Missouri Attorney General’s office which will allow Morningland to test batches of their cheese that have been under embargo since August by the Missouri Milk Board.

The Missouri Attorney General’s office, representing the Missouri Milk Board in legal action against Morningland Dairy, offered eight stipulations under which they would not object to the dairy testing their cheese. After negotiations, Morningland Dairy and the Missouri Milk Board settled on six requirements to be followed. The stipulations agreed to are that the Milk Board be present, have three representatives observing, receive split samples of the cheese, approve the sampling and analysis process, receive results after testing, and receive production dates of sampled cheese. The two stipulations that were dropped were the advance identification of the lab to do the testing and the identity of the individual who designed the protocol for test sample collection. The removal of these conditions is significant to Morningland because approved laboratories are licensed by the agencies investigating the contamination, and this secures the opportunity for testing through a non-affiliated lab in the nature of a double-blind study.

During the course of the investigation Joseph and Denise Dixon, owners of Morningland Dairy, have maintained that they should be allowed to do properly sampled tests on the alleged contaminants to clear their cheese for sale. Denise Dixon said, “It seems to me that if tests that are done improperly can condemn our cheese, accurately done tests should be able to exonerate the cheese.”

Conversely, Don Falls of the Missouri Milk Board has stated, “If you want to do testing for investigational purposes only, that would be fine.” The Milk Board has held that all Morningland Dairy’s cheese is suspect and must be destroyed. Joe Dixon responds, “We hope that the Milk Board will see reason. If properly collected test results indicate the cheese is clear of contamination, we should be allowed to sell and resume production.”

The agreement does not state that Morningland Dairy may resume normal business operations if tests indicate no pathogenic concerns.

It's All Suspect...

2010-11-07T09:55:00.000-08:00

As many of you know, I have been deeply involved in the Morningland Dairy Debacle. This past week brought several documents to light that shed a very harsh light on the agencies involved in the Rawesome raid that led to the Morningland shut down and recall of all of their production without due process. Read the article and associated documents below and let me know what you think.

This is on David Gumpert's blog, The Complete Patient, and has a pretty good of amount of commentary already. Some of it is like reading code and not getting it, but a lot of it is quite insightful. (The article as it appears on Complete Patient has one or little technical errors in it because of many bouts of editing to clarify the complex issues. The one below is completely accurate and the docs support it....thanks for your humanity!)

Feel free to pass this on. The only oversight for agencies is we the people.

.....Or Is it Just Suspicious?

By Doreen Hannes

The issues that brought a tiny Missouri farmstead cheese plant to the forefront in the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s war on raw dairy continue to expand, and trouble. As a wise man once said, “Truth is stranger than fiction.” The intrigue doesn’t dissipate at all with the increase in information regarding Morningland Dairy. The tests, methods and procedures that began this tragedy are very questionable.

Let’s back up a step. On June 30, agents from five or six agencies raided Rawesome Food Club in the Venice section of Los Angeles. They covered the security cameras after about a minute, and proceeded to spend several hours rummaging through the place and confiscating product--about $11,000 worth, according to Rawesome. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration took a bunch of stuff, and the California Department of Food and Agriculture took another bunch of stuff, leaving lists of seized items.
All the seized products appear to have been sent for testing to the CDFA. (I say “appear to” because no one has formally said anything, but the report of contamination of Morningland Dairy cheese came from CDFA.)

The test results given to Morningland by the CDFA show reports for two types of cheese attributed to Morningland Dairy—‘raw milk Colby hot pepper” and “raw milk garlic”. (Remember these, I’m going to test you on them later.) The scientific information on these reports is heavily redacted and lack the detail that would have been required to pass a college course on Biology....at a reputable school, anyway.

The first thing that strikes one as extremely odd about the lab test report is that it fails to cite the name of the company in the product description. Secondly, there are no batch numbers for the cheese. These indicate the production date of food and help isolate potential problem areas. Thirdly, while they cite two types of cheese, there are two photocopies of the same one-pound block of Morningland Dairy Garlic Colby showing its weight as .87 lb. Then there are the key results: “L. monocytogenes detected” and ‘staph aur. detected”. Because of the oddities--the lack of batch numbers, failure to identify the manufacturer and the missing photograph of “Morningland Hot Pepper Colby”, I asked Denise Dixon of Morningland for the invoices of Rawesome’s purchases from Morningland prior to the June raid.

Discrepancies

The invoices indicate that Rawesome (invoiced to James Stewart) purchased cheese in October and November of 2009, and May and June of 2010. The invoices reveal Rawesome purchased Morningland Dairy Hot Pepper Colby in ½ pound blocks, but there was no picture of this cheese with the CDFA lab report. The majority of cheese purchased by Rawesome from Morningland Dairy was goat cheese, which runs under Morningland’s Ozark Hills label. All cheeses invoiced to Rawesome were in ½ pound packages, and Morningland had sold no “Morningland Dairy Garlic Colby” to Rawesome at all. So where did this one-pound block of Garlic Colby in the CDFA picture come from?

After finding these anomalies, Denise Dixon contacted the CDFA for more information on the tests conducted of Morningland Dairy or Ozark Hills products seized from Rawesome. She contacted Dr. Stephen Beam, the head of its dairy division, via email, and was told that only two samples of Morningland products were taken and that no samples of Ozark Hills (Morningland Dairy’s Goat cheese line) were collected. So, they sampled a type of cheese that was never sold to Rawesome (Morningland Dairy Garlic) and had none of the most recent order of Ozark Hills goat cheese in their inventory at all. Hmm, says I. The most recent Morningland invoice to Rawesome was entirely Morningland’s Ozark Hills goat cheese.

Transparency?

Interestingly, when you go through the inventory of seized items written by the CDFA, there are six items (59, 75, 76, 78, 79 and 80) that fit Morningland Dairy’s cheese descriptions (some are identified by brand). The product that was tested by CDFA and never sold to Rawesome is listed twice and numbered as 59 and 80 in the CDFA inventory. It says underneath number 59’s description “gallic colby” and is followed by “5”. We don’t know what “5” actually means, but one would think it would be either a number of packages or a weight. Some of the seized products have a weight associated with their description and some do not. There are two other entries on the inventory by CDFA stating “Morningland Dairy”, but on both of those, “Morningland” is crossed out, and one of them (item 80) is the never-sold-to-Rawesome Garlic Colby. Next to that entry is written “54”. Again, we don’t know what the “54” means. 54 packages? 54 pounds? 54 ounces? 54 grams? Who knows? Those who should know, like Dr. Beam, aren’t telling.

The statement by Dr. Beam that there were no other samples of Morningland or Ozark Hills product collected by CDFA just doesn’t make sense. The FDA also seized product from Rawesome. Its report clearly states that it took “10 subs (16 oz) of Morningland Dairy Raw Milk Cheese-Mild Cheddar from Mountain View, MO.” Despite not knowing what “subs” are (yes, I know, the sandwiches, but this is just cheese!) and the fact that Morningland did not sell 16oz blocks of cheese to Rawesome; we can verify through the invoices that Rawesome purchased Morningland Dairy Mild Cheddar cheese. It could have been taken from Rawesome inventory...just not in 1 pound blocks. Evidently, the FDA’s USPHS (United States Public Health Service) is incriminating CFDA for not following the search warrant and failing to take representative samples of ALL dairy products for laboratory testing. Either that, or Doctor Beam and CDFA don’t know how to read labels.

At best, the documentation here is terribly sloppy, and at worst, seriously inaccurate (perhaps a lawyer can tell if it might even be criminally so). Add to that the fact that all the legal proceedings—the issuance of the search warrant that allowed the seizure of the cheese and the issuance of the Missouri Milk Board’s order to destroy the cheese—have taken place in secret, and the fact that no illnesses have been attributed to Morningland cheese, one must question the motives of these agencies. How can there be any claim of due process when a business has been nearly shuttered and pushed to the brink of insolvency based on sloppy and inaccurate paperwork and entirely secret legal proceedings? Not to mention, the absence of any internal appeals procedure with the Missouri Milk Board.

Businesses should not be defamed and railroaded out of business by such sloppy procedures by government agencies. The results of the CDFA ‘investigation’ are seriously suspect; as such, they should be quarantined and subjected to a destruction order. They are the real threat to public health.

======================
If you wish to help Morningland Dairy fight for their right to exist, please donate to them at the UnCheese Party site.

Morningland Dairy on KY3 Springfield Missouri

2010-10-30T05:12:00.000-07:00

Yesterday, a reporter and crew from Channel 3 KY3 in Springfield went to Morningland and visited with Denise Dixon about the order to destroy issued by the Missouri Milk Board and the attempt to get a court order to destroy tht is in process by Missouri Atty General Koster.

Here is a link to the video:

KY3 Morningland Dairy 10/29/10

I am hoping that someone will put it up on youtube and get the video out there for all. It was a pretty fair job for sound bite short attention span theater mainstream media.But to be totally fair, it is very difficult to cover the ins and outs of the issue in less than 5 minutes. It's great that they did this piece and that they didn't slam either the State or Morningland in the final piece! Also, they said, "We'll continue to follow this story", so it definitely peaked their interest. Let's keep it in the forefront and thank this television station for covering this tragedy.

Please copy the link and leave comments so they know their coverage of this story is appreciated!

Missouri Milk Board Declares They Have No Appeal

2010-10-25T12:08:00.000-07:00

Morningland Dairy to go to Court
©Doreen Hannes

Those following the saga of Morningland Dairy should be aware that this past week has been a relentless roller coaster ride. On the upside of the roller coaster, many have donated to the Uncheese Party to help the family farmstead business in this battle, and Joe and Denise Dixon, owners of Morningland Dairy, are humbled and grateful for the generosity and dedication those committed to preserving access to real food have shown.

On the downside, the FDA sent a rather nasty toned letter asserting that they consider Morningland cheese “to pose an acute, life-threatening hazard to health”. While not a single complaint of illness has been reported in the 30 year history of Morningland, the FDA states in their letter that “because of the seriousness of this situation” Morningland “should conduct inspections for 100% effectiveness at their accounts”. You could accurately translate that to “more downtime, more money out of pocket, less likelihood of recovery”, and you’d be right.

Then, on Friday, the 22nd of October, Morningland received a certified letter from the Missouri Milk Board, that flatly negates the “Objection to Destruction and Offer of Remedy” Morningland sent on October 6th by stating that “No administrative regulations allow the appeal of the State Milk Board’s administrative order...”. So the Missouri Milk Board believes it has no reason to follow due process, nor any requirement to be held accountable for their actions if they feel like destroying someone’s lifelong-work and livelihood.

Charges Levied for Questioning Destruction Order

Apparently, the Missouri Attorney General’s office agrees that the Milk Board is above all, as on Friday, after the close of business, they sent notice of service to FTCLDF attorney Gary Cox, notifying him of a Court Ordered Injunction and charging Joseph and Denise Dixon with three counts of violating state law, as set forth by the Missouri Milk Board.

Morningland Dairy, a licensed, inspected facility that has conducted all required tests, is being charged with “Unlawful Sale of Dairy Products”.....rest of article is on Kimberly Hartke's blog

Holy Cow! It's Viral!!

2010-10-21T11:28:00.001-07:00

Last week I did a guest blog on Morningland Dairy for Kimberly Hartke and that went absolutely viral! It has nearly 19,000 Facebook "likes" and 145,000 views. Pretty amazing, and I am so thankful that people are learning about this story. There is a new Uncheese Party site where people can donate to make a stand for freedom of food choice and help keep Morningland in business.

Here is a link to the blog, and there is more to update....I will be doing another post either late tonight or very early in the morning tomorrow about recent developments. In the meantime, here is an excerpt from Kimberly's blog:

Dry Cows Coming In at Morningland Dairy

Reality? Reason?
Nah, We’ve got Regulatory Authority!

by Guest Blogger, ©Doreen Hannes 2010

Morningland Dairy is the latest attempt by the FDA to fulfill the Healthy People 2020 objective to kill raw dairy. Morningland is owned by Joseph and Denise Dixon, who operate the cheese plant and make raw cheese from cows kept right on the property and managed by one of their eldest daughters. They have 12 children, 4 who still live at home, and they have been actively engaged in real food for decades. They were caught up in the Rawesome Raid dragnet and many believe the questionable California Dept of Food and Agriculture tests on their cheese are the legal justification for the multi-agency guns drawn raid at Rawesome.

Joan Veon Passed Away

2010-10-18T21:18:00.000-07:00

I learned this evening that my friend, compatriot, and my sister, Joan Veon, passed away at 4am. Central time this morning...Ocotber 18th, 2010. I am looking forward to seeing her in the Resurrection, and I want to ask that those who feel led pray for comfort for her husband and for her family.

Joan gave much more than we can even appreciate. She attended 109 meeting of the international elites, and I know what a drain those can be. I was blessed to interview her on my show, and you can download that here: Liberty News Radio Joan Veon on Truth Farmer

To be honest, I am stunned. I am sad for all of our loss. She gave it all, and I am glad she won't have to witness the financial devastation that is coming upon us.

May she rest in peace that passes all understanding.

Radio Show Appearances-- 10/16/10 and 10/18/10

2010-10-15T10:00:00.000-07:00

Tomorrow morning I will be on Darren Weeks radio show, Govern America, at 8am Central time until 10am, or thereabouts. We'll be talking about Morningland Dairy and the facts in that case, and whatever else comes up!

On Monday, I will also be on the radio with the Intel Hub, discussing Morningland and Rawesome and similar attacks on food freedom and food choice.

In all seriousness, we need to make educated decisions about our food choices. We certainly have the capacity to do that, and we appear to have a duty to do so now with all the actual issues in the consolidated industrial food chain. Raw milk is a very hot button issue for many people, and I am a staunch proponent for raw milk. I do, however, believe that people should make informed decisions about whether or not they want to consume fresh milk. Where you get your fresh milk from does matter, and not all milk is created equal.

Personally, I like our milk the best, but those goats don't give me butter as they produce naturally homogenized milk! I really want a Jersey cow...just for butter! If anyone has a healthy Jersey they don't want, let me know! (lol)

Thanks and I'm hoping we get lots of call ins on these upcoming shows.

Morningland Dairy Moderate Update

2010-10-12T09:51:00.000-07:00

Hello All,

As many of you know, I have been actively helping Morningland Dairy in their problem with the FDA and the Missouri Milk Board. Kimberly Hartke, publicist for Weston A Price Foundation asked me to do an exclusive guest blog for her on the issue. So, of course, I did. You can read it here. She even put some pics from the farm on there!

Some very serious issues need to be addressed here. It isn't even all about our ability to make informed choices about our food. It goes much deeper than that to the very core of our justice system. Where is due process in this issue? When did we give agencies the authority to destroy our property with no indemnity? How is a business that has followed all required testing and never had an illness suddenly shut down and put out of business entirely? Why is there no clear process to be followed by agents that can then be given to businesses so they can have an idea of the processes if there is a problem? Where -in the name of all that is logical- has common sense, common courtesy and decency gone?

Please read the article, and if you have questions, I will be happy to try to answer them.

Be blessed!!!

Doreen

Go to www.newswithviews.com for my articles and many other excellent researchers on topics affecting your freedom...also my blog, www.truth-farmer.blogspot.com

"It's dangerous to be right when your government is wrong"==Voltaire

As the Worm Turns....100K fine over Worm Castings

2010-10-12T05:00:00.000-07:00

Even when you are generally quite informed about things going on in a particular sector, as I often think I am with food and ag, you miss stuff. Sometimes really, really big stuff. Last night, when I was searching for something completely unrelated, I found that I had completely missed yet another insane regulatory action. I came across an article on a blog about a man, George Hahn, in California being fined $100,000 over touting the benefits of his worm castings. After searching the actual case, I found only one other article from a newspaper that had any kind of depth to it.

WORM POOP IS A PESTICIDE, AND THEREFORE MUST BE REGULATED

Here is an excerpt from the first article I found. It's from Pacific Legal Foundation:

“Healthy plants resist pests naturally by producing enzymes that smell bad to bugs,” Sandefur explained. “Fertilizer made from worm castings helps plants to grow strong. It doesn’t do anything to bugs directly, and isn’t poisonous to them.”

“Unfortunately, Worm Gold is so effective that it alarmed state bureaucrats, who simply couldn’t allow a businessman to provide a safe, natural product to help gardeners without the state’s say-so,” said Sandefur.

The DPR determined that, because Hahn’s fertilizer boosts plants’ natural resistance to pests, it qualifies as a “pesticide” and he must obtain DPR registration – involving years of testing and thousands of dollars in fees – before he can sell it to the public. Worm Gold is already licensed as a fertilizer.

“The DPR is twisting the dictionary as it tries to fertilize and expand its bureaucratic empire,” Sandefur said. “These regulators would have us believe that anything that deters pests in any way should be called a ‘pesticide.’ At a hearing last summer, a couple of these bureaucrats were even brazen enough to say that water is a pesticide, when it is used to keep insects off of plant stems.”
Timothy Sandefur---Principal Attorney

YET ANOTHER DIGGING EXPEDITION

As I dug, I found only one article from a Sacremento site that had any depth to it and revealed any particulars on the case. Evidently, there were allegations that Hahn, the owner of the company selling Worm Gold had asserted that worm castings were somehow pesticides. While you certainly can't dump worm castings around a squash bg infested zucchini plant and expect it to kill them, if you have really good soil with proper microorganisms, some of those microorganisms will inhibit pests and make the plants less susceptible to infestation as well as help the plant to generally be more thrifty and fruitful.....But evidently, you can't say that any thing is good for anything any longer without paying boat loads of money to some agency to have them verify that there is some science based fact that they recognize as valid. Kind of like when Diamond Walnuts said that walnuts are good for your health and was fined quite heavily by the FDA.

On August 16th, Hahn was found guilty of not registering worm castings as a pesticide with the California Department of Pesticide Regulation (so he could validate making any claims about it) and fined $100,000 for this violation. Pacific Legal Foundation is appealing and, if there is any reason left in this world (LOL), they will prevail.

THE FUTURE LOOKS BRIGHT!

It appears that in the not too distant future mothers across the country may be thrown in jail for telling their children to eat their vegetables because they are "good for them". Apparently the only legitimate way to nutritionally distinguish a twinkie from broccoli may rest on the FDA and their enforcement abilities, and differentiating between milk and oil and worm poop and Sevin Dust is on the EPA. Since the FDA approves GMO's and says nanoparticles haven't yet caused a problem and are therefore acceptable, and took 30 years to finally concede that vitamin C may strengthen the immune system, I'm sure we can all be content with any federal or state agencies thinking on our environment and health.

Every day there appears to another travesty of justice occurring, and I find that the refrain from that old Talking Heads song runs regularly through my mind...."and you may ask yourself, "Self, How did I get here?" I guess the answer is via regulations. Sheesh.

WalMart Wants More!

2010-10-11T08:16:00.000-07:00

What do you want when you are the new Global Supply Sargent? More purchasing power, of course! WalMart is dominating the American grocery retail sector already and they want the world....I think they may get it, too. I often call them the New World Order Company Store, but, I guess I'm a bit of a cynic.

I wonder what will happen when Walmart, who is too big to fail, founders?

Here's an article about how much they love to keep giving you the lowest price.....

Wal-Mart Wants More Buying Clout

The world's largest retailer is convinced it can cut even better deals by consolidating its purchasing of raw materials with partners

By Matthew Boyle and Carol Wolf

Wal-Mart Stores (WMT) purchasing chief Hernan Muntaner has a dream: teaming the giant retailer with soda and snack maker PepsiCo (PEP) to buy potatoes jointly for a lower price than either company can get on its own. That would allow both to earn more money on the chips and spuds they sell in Wal-Mart's supermarkets. So far, Pepsi isn't playing along. But with sales slowing in the U.S. and the price of sugar, meat, and wheat on the rise, the world's largest retailer is jointly purchasing a growing share of raw ingredients with manufacturers of food and household products sold in its stores. Products already being purchased with suppliers include sugar, which goes into the company's store-brand soda and five-pound bags, and paper, used in Wal-Mart's back-office printers. Muntaner envisions a day when his company will do it with most goods it sells.

"Around the world, we found we were buying the same raw materials" that Wal-Mart suppliers buy, says Muntaner, whose official title is vice-president for international purchase leverage. "When you put the volume together of what we bought and what [suppliers] bought, and buy from just one supplier, you can reduce the cost."

It's all about the retailing giant doing what it's become famous for: squeezing costs out of its supply chain. And although Wal-Mart is already feared by many suppliers for its enormous buying clout, it's convinced it can cut even better deals by consolidating its purchasing with partners. Currently, only makers of private label goods sold under Wal-Mart's house brands have joined in its so-called collaborative sourcing program. Manufacturers of branded products have taken a pass because they're loath to share pricing data and product formulas, say executives at three companies approached by Wal-Mart. Pepsi declined to comment.

Muntaner says that "in most cases" the branded companies "are more sophisticated than we are" in buying raw materials. "But we have found times when that wasn't the case," he adds. He declines to give specifics. "Sometimes it's very hard with a big company to have conversations like this," Muntaner says. "That is the main reason why we don't have Pepsi yet."

Muntaner's primary job is to circle the globe helping Wal-Mart's international divisions, from China to Japan to Brazil, find ways to use the company's massive buying muscle to lower what it spends on everything from copier paper to store-branded bottled water. Increasingly, that means selling the benefits of sourcing collaboratively. Muntaner says a soda maker, which he declines to name, has teamed up with Wal-Mart in Britain to buy sugar. The soda company paid 14 percent less, he says. Wal-Mart's sugar costs also fell, savings it used to lower the price of bags of its own house brand of sugar.

In Chile, where Wal-Mart has 259 locations, the retailer teamed up with a paper supplier and managed to cut Wal-Mart's own paper costs by 2.5 percent because of the greater bargaining clout. Wal-Mart is also jointly purchasing rice and could extend the program to everyday products such as household cleaners, vitamins, and produce. "We can do this with anything that is sold," Muntaner says.

This is just the company's latest attempt at slowing expense growth. Wal-Mart is already consolidating its roster of suppliers, eliminating distribution middlemen in nations such as Japan, and taking over the U.S. trucking operations from some of its suppliers in a bid to haul goods more cheaply. International chief Doug McMillon says the company is saving hundreds of millions of dollars a year from such changes—and wants savings of over a billion dollars eventually.

The bottom line: Wal-Mart is trying to increase its buying clout by teaming with suppliers to jointly purchase raw materials at better prices.

Boyle is deputy Corporations editor for BusinessWeek. Wolf is a reporter for Bloomberg News.

Morningland Dairy- Update

2010-10-08T05:01:00.000-07:00

If you read my article on News With Views about the FDA and Missouri Milk Board shutting down Morningland Dairy, then you have a good background for a quick update....If not, I suggest you read the article and perhaps visit the Morningland blog to get a good idea of what is happening.

Yesterday, after Morningland published their "Objection to Order to Destroy" and sent out a press release about it, they were contacted by the Attorney General's office and told to be in court TODAY for a hearing in Howell County Circuit Court asking for a restraining order against them to protect the public from the cheese, I guess, and also a preliminary injunction to (among other things) prevent them from "continuing and future violations of Missouri's dairy law."

If their actions alone don't say it, that citation from the notice of service clearly indicates that the Missouri Milk Board is acting as the agent for the FDA and believes that raw dairy is inherently dangerous and -all- adulterated. That's how I see it anyway. If others see it differently, I would like to know how.

Here is the Press Release and Objection to order to destroy copied and pasted below.You can find the documents from the state at NICFA's website, and the court docs will be posted there soon.....BTW, the Attorney General's office called at 4:50pm yesterday to tell them court was canceled because they couldn't get 2 of their witnesses there. I think giving 24 hour notice of a court date over approximately $250,000 worth of product is less than honorable. One assertion in the court docs is that the product is that "immediate and irreparable injury, loss or damage will result if the condemned cheese products are not destroyed". As if cheese sitting in a cooler can climb out and go kill somebody. Hyperbole, anyone?

Here are the Press Release and Objection to Order to Destroy:

=====================FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE===================
Date: October 6th 2010
Subject: Family Run Dairy Ordered to Destroy 50,000 Pounds of Cheese
Subheading: Battle Over Raw Dairy Products Has a New Epicenter

Morningland Dairy has issued an objection to the Missouri Milk Board’s “order to destroy” their inventory of raw aged cheese. The cheese is being held on their property under an embargo issued by the Missouri Milk Board on August 26th, 2010. The embargo on all Morningland’s product was issued in response to tests done by the California Department of Food and Agriculture on cheese seized in a raid on Rawesome Foods in Venice, Ca. on June 30th. The embargo halted all production and sales of Morningland cheese.
Missouri Milk Board gave Morningland a verbal order of destruction on September 24th. Joseph Dixon, owner and General Manager of Morningland, then requested that Gene Wiseman, Executive Secretary of the Missouri Milk Board, provide written notice of the order to destroy and the method of destruction. Wiseman wrote the order to destroy on October 1st and it was hand delivered by Don Falls of the Missouri Milk Board to Morningland Dairy on October 1st, but it did not include the destruction procedures.
Denise Dixon, owner and General Manager of Morningland Dairy says, “Morningland has been producing raw aged cheese for 30 years, and in that time, absolutely no reports of illness have been made by anyone who has consumed our product. We are, and remain, wholly committed to providing good, healthful food to our customers. The order to destroy nearly 50,000 or so pounds of our cheese is not associated with even one complaint of illness, and we believe it’s an over reaction at best.”
In their objection to the destruction order, Morningland offers a remedy based on sound and verifiable scientific testing. Denise Dixon says, “It is our hope that reason and common sense will prevail. Until that happens, it appears that the State of Missouri and the FDA are more interested in putting us out of business than allowing consumers to have a choice in their food.”
At this point there is no written assurance from the Missouri Milk Board indicating that Morningland will be allowed to resume production or distribution of their products.

Objection to Order to Destroy Dairy Product at Morningland Dairy

Morningland of the Ozarks, LLC, dba Morningland Dairy, is in receipt of recommendations by the Missouri Milk Board and representatives of the Missouri Department of Agriculture, ultimately ordering the destruction of ALL cheese produced by Morningland Dairy from January 1st, 2010, through August 26th, 2010. Morningland Dairy LLC hereby gives notice to the Missouri Milk Board and the Missouri Department of Agriculture and their agents, that we object to this order and request due process be followed before any further destruction of our property, wealth, and ability to provide ourselves and our customers, with a desired and healthful product is incurred.

Morningland Dairy is, and has been, committed to providing a growing clientele with raw milk cheeses for more than 30 years. In thirty years, there have been no reports of illness associated with consumption of our cheese.

Because of the untenable nature of the order of destruction, we cannot comply and we formally lodge our objection to this order and request that the order issued by Gene Wiseman, Executive Secretary of the Missouri Milk Board, be immediately rescinded. Instead, Morningland Dairy requests that all parties involved consider the scientifically sound and common sense remedy to the allegations of “contamination” of our product be applied. This remedy can be found at the end of this document.

Many of the “facts” as stated by the Missouri Milk Board et al in the order to destroy and the attachments thereto are both incorrect and unscientific. A brief rebuttal to the major inconsistencies and substantive errors follow:

1) To date, there has been no legitimate test performed on Morningland Dairy cheese, although Morningland Dairy owners have repeatedly requested that proper tests be done. California authorities did not sign the test they allegedly performed until 55 days after product was seized at gunpoint from Rawesome Foods. No sample of said product was shared with Morningland Dairy as is required by California and Missouri statutes; therefore, there is no confirmation of the findings reported by California Food and Department of Agriculture.

2) Morningland Dairy plant manager, Jedadiah York, and Plant Owner/Gen.Manager, Denise Dixon, apprised Don Falls of the Missouri State Milk Board that more than two samples of Morningland Dairy cheese had apparently been tested in California, and that those results should be considered in the situation of alleged contamination of Morningland Dairy cheese. Mr. Falls’ reply was that he was not told about it, and we repeatedly asked him to look into that situation. Mr. Falls later stated he could not get that information from California, and that it was up to Morningland Dairy to request it. Instead of getting the requested information, he repeatedly stated that we just needed to “concentrate on doing the recall”.

3) Despite being aware that several types of Morningland Dairy cheese had been tested and evidently tested clear by the California Department of Food and Agriculture, Mr. Falls insisted that all of our cheese must be recalled, not just the two batches that were identified from the alleged contamination found in the California test.

4) No Missouri State Milk Board representative obtained samples from Morningland Dairy. Instead, at the request of Morningland Dairy owners, samples were taken by a Morningland Dairy employee, and submitted to Microbe Inotech Laboratories, Inc., of St. Louis, MO, (this lab was suggested by Don Falls of the Missouri State Milk Board) on August 27, 2010 for testing.

5) The only witness to the sampling from Morningland Dairy was the employee who did the sampling. When Morningland Dairy owners, Joseph & Denise Dixon, learned how the samples were taken, they knew that the tests would be inaccurate and, consequently, erroneous. Despite repeatedly informing Don Falls and also Audra Ashemore, of the FDA, of the faulty sampling methods, both of these individuals used the results of this inept test in their reports.

6) Mr. Falls failed to see to it that samples bore the signature of the person taking the samples, which is required by section 196.565 of the Revised Missouri Statutes. Although Mr. Falls states that an employee of Morningland Dairy delivered said samples to Microbe Inotech Laboratories, Inc., the samples were in fact given to a family member of Joseph & Denise Dixon. She, in turn, met another family member in Edgar Springs, MO, who then took said samples to said lab. Neither of these family members is an employee of Morningland Dairy. These facts are reported to illustrate the falseness of Mr. Wiseman’s statement that “State Milk Board staff documented chain of custody and maintained the integrity of samples by ensuring the storage containers where the cheese products were kept were properly sealed, labeled and secured.”

7) Three FDA representatives took 100 swab/sponge tests of the cheese plant and the milk barn at Morningland Dairy during the first week of September. The following week, Audra Ashemore of the FDA, called Plant Manager York, to say that the swab test results were in, and that the tests came back clear. When Mrs. Dixon requested a copy of these test results, Ms. Ashemore stated that Morningland Dairy would receive a copy, and that the FDA did not have a copy. To date, Morningland Dairy has not received a copy of said results, and no mention has since been made of the fact that both the cheese plant and the milk barn tested clear.

In conclusion, due to the lack of scientific evidence, lack of transparent protocol and complete lack of any illness associated with our cheese, and the absurdity of the assertion that ALL, nearly all, or even some of Morningland Dairy cheese is actually below standard, we –again- offer to test each batch of cheese in our cooler prior to shipping the product to our customers.
Because of the fact that it is far from a light matter to put families out of work and out of business when no harm has occurred to anyone in a thirty-year history, we are more than reluctant to destroy nearly 50,000 pounds of food based on erroneous tests. We have always appreciated the input and advise of the Missouri Department of Agriculture and Milk Board and have no issues with following logical and scientifically accurate suggestions and recommendations. We do, however, have no desire to harm our customers or ourselves by following unjust, unscientific, faulty processes that destroy the health and livelihoods of those involved with our company.

At this point, October 6th, 2010, we have been required to recall 6 months of work, have been completely shut down and forced to dump milk for nearly 5 weeks, are being told we must destroy at least 8 months of work, and have no assurance that we will be allowed to continue to produce our product without further subjection to overzealous enforcement actions on the part of the FDA or the Missouri Milk Board.

We seek justice, reason, logic and decency, and we desire to live peaceably and to profit from our labor. Due process is inherent in our system, and we request that it be followed.

Proposed Remedy from Morningland of the Ozarks, LLC to the Missouri Milk Board and Representatives of the Missouri Department of Agriculture

1) Morningland Dairy will diligently strive to put into action those reasonable procedural recommendations rendered in the Memorandums from the MO State Milk Board and Dr. Harold Treese, as soon as finances and circumstances allow.
2) Morningland Dairy will diligently perform two microbial tests, using a state approved lab of our choice, on each batch of cheese in order to identify any contamination, and will offer for sale only cheese batches that are found to be free of contamination. Any cheese batch that tests positive for contamination will not be offered for sale.

==================
===end===

Stalled Food Safety??? We shall see........

2010-09-21T09:26:00.000-07:00

So I am in throes of dissecting the "bipartisan", same as if not worse than it ever was, Senate Bill 510. There is a lot of hoopla going on about it. The people who actually think it is somehow beneficial to give the FDA USDA, CBP and DHS more power than they already have to do the job that they aren't doing are out in force. Merler is a law firm that sues on food safety issues, and he is the biggest public proponent of this legisation. He has a post on how upsetting it is that there appear to be power structure problems with pushing this bill through, and was actually good enough to post some negative comments about the bill. You can read that on his blog, Marler and weigh in if you feel inclined.

I've been spending an awful lot of time with Morningland Dairy in their effort to try to get common sense in the regulatory approach to their recall situation. At this point, the Missouri Milk Board is "recommending" that they destroy all cheese in their cooler made through June the 25th. This is a little more than a half year of work. Morningland wants to test their uncut blocks of cheese, and the Milk Board is still taking the position that they simply should destroy all of it. Seemingly, Morningland has to get permission from the Milk Board to actually test their cheese. I find this ludicrous and nonsensical. Not a single illness or complaint about their product has been levied. I am more than certain that if Kraft has an issue, they don't close them down for a month and then ask them to destroy half a year's worth of work.

What we have in Morningland is definitely a double standard from large entities to smaller entities. They want to test the actual cheese and implement "recommended" "good manufacturing practices" and wish to test every lot of cheese for several months before they will ship it out. But they are being stopped from testing what they already have. Kooky.....IF common sense is given any thought at all, but if not, then this is all perfectly logical.

I should finish my article on 510 soon. Have a great day!!

Last Show on Liberty News Radio-9-18-10

2010-09-17T14:32:00.000-07:00

Yes, it is going to be my last show on Liberty News Radio tomorrow morning. I will have a guest on with me who is very studied on the One World One Health Initiative that is already being legitimized in law in the United States, and it will NOT be better for your freedom, your health, your pocketbook or your choices. It's an all around bad deal that you will want to understand the terminology linked to it, as well as the scope and method of implementation.

My guest has put together a wonderful document to help you learn this program and while I cannot post the entire thing here (lack of time and my general ineptitude with -blogger-) I've put a snippet below and you can email me at animalwaitress@yahoo.com with the heading "OWOH Paper" and I will be happy to send it to you. I encourage everyone to download an archive of this program from the show archives section of Liberty News Radio.

As I said in the "Something's Happening Here" post below, I will be doing a lot of radio still, just giving up my own show, so look for me on Derry Brownfield, The Power Hour and the Liberty Roundtable on a regular basis.

Be Blessed, everyone!

Doreen

Here is a taste of the document for tomorrow's show:

Truth Farmer Listeners

The One Health Cash Cow

From a Texas A & M: Mass Animal Carcass Management Powerpoint

The Global Cash Cow is strategically placed in many government and higher education powerpoints

There is a United Nations code that few people are aware of. They are the Terrestrial
Animal Health Code, Terrestrial Manual of Diagnostics & Vaccinations, and Terrestrial Aquatic Code combined are that is the equivalent of 9 reams of copy paper!

➢ This code was established because the US is a UN Member Signatory
➢ This code was not brought to you or you public officials for a vote
➢ This code when fully implemented will regulate every facet of your life
➢ This code defines you as an animal and you will be treated as the global herd

Under the Terrestrial Animal Health Code you are defined as an animal.

An animal means a mammal, bird or bee (1)

Don’t think so?

From the Summer Edition of the One World, One Health Newsletter, Volume 3, Issue 3

Highlights: “My Future Veterinary Career in Human Health.”

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

More Insanity!!!

2010-09-13T09:44:00.000-07:00

County Sues Farmer, Cites Too Many Crops
WSB-TV

http://www.wsbtv.com/news/24979774/detail.html

Posted: 5:20 pm EDT September 12, 2010Updated: 10:00 am EDT September 13, 2010
DEKALB COUNTY, Ga. -- DeKalb County is suing a local farmer for growing too many vegetables, but he said he will fight the charges in the ongoing battle neighbors call “Cabbagegate.”

Fig trees, broccoli and cabbages are among the many greens that line the soil on Steve Miller’s more than two acres in Clarkston, who said he has spent fifteen years growing crops to give away and sell at local farmers markets.

“It's a way of life, like it's something in my blood,” said Miller.

In January, Dekalb County code enforcement officers began ticketing him for growing too many crops for the zoning and having unpermitted employees on site.

Miller stopped growing vegetables this summer and the charges were put on hold as he got the property rezoned.

WATCH: Farmer Sued For Excessive Veggies

Two weeks after approval, however, his attorney said the county began prosecuting the old charges, saying he was technically in violation before the rezoning.

“It should go away. I think it borders on harassment,” said Miller’s attorney Doug Dillard.

Miller faces nearly $5,000 in fines, but he said he plans to fight those citations in recorders court later this month.

A county spokesperson said officials can’t discuss the matter while it is in court, but neighbors were quick to come to his defense.

“When he moved here and I found out what he was doing I said, ‘Steve, you’re the best thing that ever happened to Cimarron Drive. And I still say that,” said neighbor Britt Fayssoux.

Something Happening Here.....

2010-09-12T03:40:00.000-07:00

And what it is, is pretty durn clear. If you'll read the posts below, you will see a concerted effort to shut down raw dairy distribution of any variety. And if you'll go to News With Views, and read the articles, you will get all the click through links to the documents substantiating my claim.

The past month has been very, very busy here. Not with things I really -want- to do, but with a lot of fighting for facts and answers from the actions against farmers and food clubs across this country.

As most of you know, I have a radio show on Liberty News Radio every Saturday from 10-11am Central time. September 18th is going to be the last show for Truth Farmer on Liberty News Radio. It's going to be one of the deep educational type shows on One World One Health, which is a trademark of the World Conservation Society, and a full fusion global initiative to form and transform all areas of health. And I mean all. It is the interface for human, animal and environmental health. I will have a guest on who is very adept at finding the 'processes' that governments use to push these global initiatives without any actual legislative authority. It will be a show that you will want to download and listen to more than once or twice so you get the full effect and procedures of this global initiative that will be de facto law in the not too distant future.

The reason(s) I am giving the show up are that I am simply needed more at home, and I usually spend 8-10 hours on prep for the show, so that time will now go to my children and their schooling. I might even try to make cookies for them twice a month! For five years I have been more than a full time unpaid ag-tivist, and I often wonder exactly how that feels for the children. I've spoken with the sixteen year old in depth about it, and she tells me "I know it's necessary, but it is really kinda weird." The 18 year old is more pragmatic, "If you got paid it would make more sense, but I guess someone has to do it, and you seem to be good at it...You know we're proud of you, right?" And the little one just wants cookies and more play time.

So what I am definitely going to do is be a regular guest on at least three radio shows that have much larger audiences than I could ever get doing a one hour a week show on the weekend. This will reach more people with this important information and allow me to use my time more efficiently. For the past three months I have been doing a regular once a month slot on The Power Hour every second Monday at 9am Central time. Beginning next month, I will be on Sam Bushman's Liberty Round Table at 8am Central every first Monday of the month. I am also a regular on the Derry Brownfield Show, and I think we're going to firm up a schedule on that soon, but that show is M-F at 10am Central.

Also, I will (Yah willing and the crick don't rise) be writing more regularly for News With Views and continuing to participate on R-CALF USA's Animal Id Committee, and will work with The Ozarks PRC and continue my work with the National Independent Consumer and Farmers Association as the Director of Research.

So I will still have plenty of volunteer work. If anyone wants to donate to my efforts, please send me an e-mail (animalwaitress@yahoo.com). Every little bit helps, and prayer is greatly appreciated as well!

Farming Without a License is a Criminal Enterprise

2010-09-12T03:38:00.000-07:00

©Doreen Hannes
Throughout this nation it is becoming commonplace for state and federal governments to raid food buying clubs, private food co-ops, family farms and even micro farms. The reason these raids are taking place is that the FDA has determined that we are not smart enough to decide what we want to eat. They are making sure that we have a hard time getting food that is actually good for us and fulfilling their public health mission. This is the first in a three article series profiling two cases in the state of Missouri to illustrate what will be terrifically commonplace once Senate Bill 510, (The Food Safety Modernization Act-third article) is in place.
In Missouri we have families, and a food freedom movement, that are being persecuted, and I use that term intentionally, with accusation aforethought. The first family I am going to profile is the Bechard’s of Conway, Missouri. They are facing prosecution by Attorney General Koster for violating the following State statute and were also taken to court -and convicted- by Green County Health Department for “operating a food establishment without a permit”. Basically, they are being taken to court for trying to make a living from their lawful product. Their crime? Providing people with fresh milk that tested out to be perfectly fine and had no complaints or reports of illness associated with it at all.
The Bechard’s have a small farm, where they raise sheep, poultry and cattle and sell their products directly to consumers. They milk six cows and are not a “graded” facility. They deliver milk to their customers at a pre-arranged pick up point in the parking lot of Mama Jeans Natural Foods in Springfield, Missouri. In April of 2009, their eldest daughters were delivering the milk and were approached by someone wanting to buy a half-gallon of milk. Since they had it, they sold it to the man. Two weeks later, the same thing occurred. These two on the spot sales were to employees of the Green County Health Department.
The Health Department tested the milk. What they found was that there was no problem with the milk at all. The first half-gallon was kept overnight possibly on a kitchen counter and did have a high somatic cell count. The second batch was taken to the lab within an hour and had a very low somatic cell count attesting to the Bechard’s cleanliness. These two sales landed the Bechard’s in court.
Let’s look at the state charge first. Here is the pertinent Missouri law on milk :

State milk inspection required on all graded fluid milk or milk products--pasteurization required, exception.
196.935. No person shall sell, offer for sale, expose for sale, transport, or deliver any graded fluid milk or graded fluid milk products in this state unless the milk or milk products are graded and produced, transported, processed, manufactured, distributed, labeled and sold under state milk inspection and the same has also been produced or pasteurized as required by a regulation authorized by section 196.939 and under proper permits issued thereunder. Only pasteurized graded fluid milk and fluid milk products as defined in subdivision (3) of section 196.931 shall be sold to the final consumer, or to restaurants, soda fountains, grocery stores, or similar establishments; except an individual may purchase and have delivered to him for his own use raw milk or cream from a farm.

Evidently, Missouri Attorney General Koster doesn’t understand either the term “graded” or the meaning of the word “except”, and is opting for redefining that word by putting a family’s livelihood on the line and moving forward with prosecution of Armand Bechard for selling his milk to individuals who want the product. Koster’s argument for pursuing a case against the Bechard’s is that he has gone back and read through the floor arguments from 1972 when the law was enacted in Missouri and believes that the legislators didn’t mean what they actually wrote into law. Koster has also consulted with the bureaucracy that is “in charge” of milk in Missouri, “The Milk Board”. Incidentally, the new chair of the Milk Board is also on the Green County Health Department and is driving the charges against the Bechard’s.
For years, the Milk Board has periodically threatened providers of fresh milk with fines and penalties if they continue to sell their product. Usually, the threats come after the Milk Board has made telephone calls to providers of milk listed on a Weston A. Price website called Real Milk. We are listed on that site, and from three weeks to two months prior to actions from the Milk Board instructing people to “cease and desist” or be fined for selling milk, we receive calls for milk from several hours away asking if we have milk for sale; and then I know something is about to happen. This is exactly what happened before the “sting” on the Bechard family occurred.
In the two most recent state legislative sessions there has been a bill put forth to clarify that it is lawful for people to sell their milk to individuals for their own use. Both times, the Milk Board maintained that it wasn’t necessary and once they even wrote a letter for dissemination clarifying that it was indeed legal to sell milk from a farm directly to an individual.
Attorney General Koster asked the Bechard’s to sign a consent decree that states they will never deliver milk at a common pick up point again and instead will take all milk directly to the residence of the people wanting the milk. It also stipulates that the Bechard’s are guilty of violating state law and amounts to a confession of guilt.
Not too surprisingly, this wasn’t an appealing way to resolve the issue for the Bechard’s. We are talking about a product that is not stable in all temperatures and that needs to stay cool so it doesn’t go bad and breed bacteria. If they were to drop off product at residences, there is no telling how long the product could be without refrigeration. People do still work, and most families have both the husband and wife working, so the chances of meeting people at their homes when delivery is possible for all parties is small. The Bechard’s, like anyone in business, are interested in keeping their customers happy, so increasing the chances of sour milk on the doorstep isn’t an idea they want to entertain.

This case will begin in earnest this fall, and the availability of fresh milk in Missouri is dependent on the outcome of this State case against the Bechard’s.
Armand Bechard says, “In 2003 we called and asked the Health Department if we needed to do anything special to sell our milk and they told us that in our situation, according to the law, we were a farm and therefore exempt; we needed no permits at all. That’s what the code in Green County actually states, and we have been selling milk since then in this manner.” Asked if there had been any changes to the municipal code and Armand asserts that there are no changes regarding farm products. The only thing offered in explanation of the suit against them was that the Health Department had adopted the 1999 FDA Food Code. So, evidently, if someone from the Health Department says you need a permit, then you need a permit; even if state and county law don’t require it. Never mind what the law actually says, we’re now being run by the whimsy of agents running off initiatives of Federal bureaucracies. It’s not too comforting for those of us who tend to think unregulated thoughts.
Common sense would dictate that the Bechard case should be a non-issue. No reports of illnesses and no complaints whatsoever about the product, no clear violation of the law, should be no problem, right? But we can’t apply logic to the legal system. The judge found Armand Bechard guilty of violating the Green County Health Department’s adoption of the 1999 FDA Food Code by “operating a food establishment without a permit”. The family pick up truck used to deliver milk is the “establishment”. The County was asking for $1,000 fine and 6 months in jail for selling an unregulated product that caused no harm to any one. The sentence rendered was a $250 fine. Bechard is appealing and has been awarded a new trial.
So the question becomes, what is the Food Code? It is currently a nearly 700 page document for cities, counties, states and local governments to write regulations for their citizens. The initiatives in the Food Code are not necessarily Federal law, they are generally desires of the FDA and are more in line with the international Food Code of Codex Alimentarius than actual regulations or statutes from the Federal government. Wholesale adoption of the Food Code is a dangerous thing for freedom, yet nearly all states have adopted some version as part of their Health Department program. Cooperative Agreements between state and local governments to implement the Food Code are usually accompanied by a big sweaty pile of your money. One of these initiatives included in the Food Code is Healthy People 2020. This is a program through HHS that is supposed to make us all quite healthy. One objective of Healthy People 2020 is to increase the number of states that prohibit the sale or distribution of unpasteurized dairy products.
Missouri is a state with a very obstinate strain of people, especially in the Ozarks region of the state where the Bechard’s and Morningland Dairy (the other issue I am profiling for you in this series) are located. The Missouri Mule is famous because it adequately displays the characteristics of the citizens of the state. As a general rule, we won’t be pushed or coerced into doing something we don’t want to do. I personally find it a little more than interesting that the MIAC Report, targeting close to 70% of the citizens of the state and these recent attacks on raw dairy are happening here, where resistance is great.
If Missouri falls to full implementation of the Food Code and Healthy People 2020 the rest of the states will likely be little competition for the overreaching federal government controls brought to full enforcement by the Food Safety Modernization Act (S510). Meanwhile, we continue to fight for the right to eat what we choose, and the Bechard family faces increasing court costs. The bottom line of all of this is that if you are at all interested in agriculture, meaning you have an interest in continuing to eat food, you must become an ‘agtivist’. No Farmers-No Food.

Milk….It’s a Menace!!!

2010-09-12T03:36:00.000-07:00

©Doreen Hannes 2010

This is the second of three articles to demonstrate the effects that Senate Bill S510, the Food Safety Modernization Act, will have on all of us. The third article in this series will be devoted to Senate bill S 510. As you read this article, it’s important to keep in mind that while the US Congress was on August recess, Senate bill S510, that will completely control the production of food, was resubmitted as a bipartisan complete substitute for the original.
On June 30th of this year, a private food co-op named Rawesome, founded by a rather iconoclastic individual by the name of Aajonus (pronounced odd-genus) Vonderplanitz was raided in Venice, California. The co-op’s members prefer to eat all raw food and have many personal testimonies of the benefits they have received from following the paleo-diet and eating all things raw. The raid involved multiple agencies - the FBI, FDA, California Department of Food and Agriculture and the Health Department among them. The agents entered with drawn guns and seized all products from the private food club. Among the products seized was raw cheese from the licensed and inspected Morningland Dairy in Mountain View, Missouri.
Morningland Dairy is a small raw cheese company that has been in business for 30 years with no reports of illness from their products ever being levied. They milk cows on site and use that milk to make their cheese in a separate building. Denise and Joe Dixon took over operation of Morningland Dairy several years ago and expanded the operation to include goat cheese made from Missouri family-run goat dairies. The cheese is sold directly to consumers and to grocery stores across the nation. According to Joe, nine families are dependent upon Morningland for their livelihood.
On August 24th, fifty-five days after the cheese from Morningland Dairy was seized by agents at Rawesome, the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) tested the cheese and reported that they “detected” listeria monocytogenes and staph aureous in two cheeses. The CDFA then reported this “detection” to the Missouri Milk Board and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). On August 26th, the Missouri Milk Board contacted the cheesemaker from Morningland Dairy, Jedadiah York, and told him they were coming by to discuss a problem with some cheese. Denise and Joe Dixon were at the American Cheese Society convention in Seattle when this call occurred. Jedadiah called them and told them that Milk Board Inspectors, Don Falls and Roger Neill, were coming to the plant to talk about a problem and the Dixons said to fully cooperate and find out what the problem might be. And that’s when things began to get interesting.
The Missouri Milk Board Inspectors had no batch numbers or paperwork to show to Mr. York, but they pulled up the report from CDFA on Morningland’s computer and show Jedadiah the picture of cheese that was definitely under a Morningland label. However, the codes, which would tell the Plant Manager the dates of the batches, were not visible in the photos nor recorded on the CDFA report. Details were completely lacking. No levels regarding the amount of bacteria detected in the cheese were indicated on the CDFA report, no chain of custody regarding the product, no explanation of sample temperature controls or the lack of such were delineated, and no reports or complaints of illness had been made. Mr. Falls of the Missouri Milk Board told Jedadiah they would be back in the morning and that he expected to have this all taken care of very soon. The inspectors checked into a hotel and came back the next morning.
When the inspectors returned, Jedadiah was told that the FDA would be coming and heading up the investigation and that Morningland would need to suspend all operations until the investigation was complete. Their cheese was put under embargo by Missouri Milk Board and immediately inventoried, and an official notice taped to the cooler door to not remove any product. Jedadiah thought that if he simply went along and did all things the agents asked, that Morningland would be up and running again in a matter of days. This was on August 27th, and two weeks later he sees things a bit differently.
On the 27th, Michele Thompson, the Recall Coordinator for the FDA, sent Jedadiah an email asking that a recall notice of all product from 2010 be sent to the Associated Press immediately. The Dixons, General Managers for Morningland LLC, told Jedadiah to just wait until they returned from the American Cheese Society convention they had attended so they could get a better understanding of the situation by being there in person. Again, no illnesses or complaints had been reported from any consumers of Morningland’s products, and it is a very serious action to recall half a year of work based on the findings of an agency with no detailed information on the tests performed.
Nonetheless, over the weekend the FDA prepared and released a press release stating that Morningland Dairy was –voluntarily- recalling ALL of their product made from January through June 2010 nationwide, even though Morningland had not authorized the recall. This release went out at 12:01am Monday morning before the FDA showed up at Morningland in camoflauge to inspect the cheese plant. At that point, there had been no communication to the heads of Morningland regarding the lot numbers that were tested in California and no agreement to recall a half year’s work on an unsubstantiated test. The FDA’s Michele Thompson later communicated to Morningland that the FDA did not have the authority to “push for a recall” as that was against the law. She requested Morningland change commentary on their website to be in line with FDA policy. The fact remains that the FDA issued a press release announcing a recall prior to Morningland approving a recall. In other words, Morningland hadn’t volunteered to be bankrupted, yet the FDA issued a national notice stating that they had.
Joseph and Denise Dixon are committed to making a safe product. Joe says, “If we have a problem, we definitely want to deal with it, and we are willing to do whatever is necessary to ensure that we provide our customers with a trustworthy and healthy product. We do all the tests that we are required to do and are committed to our customers well being. We want to provide living, healthful food that blesses people.”
Back to the ‘facts of the case’, as it were. As mentioned before, Morningland has dairy cattle on the same property as the cheese plant, and they use that milk to make their cow cheese. When the issue of potential contamination first reared it’s ugly head, the Missouri Milk Board Field Inspector, Don Falls, told the Dixons that they would be able to sell their cow milk into the normal commercial (pasteurized) chain without much difficulty. They would simply need to find a co-op that would put them on their route and get their barn inspected and graded by the Milk Board as a Grade A dairy barn. As it turns out, that wasn’t quite accurate.
The Dixons found two milk co-ops that would pick up their milk as soon as they were graded and inspected by the Milk Board. Then the Milk Board told them that until the FDA “cleared” Morningland, they wouldn’t inspect their dairy barn. So the Dixons are left dumping their milk, unable to bring in any compensation for their labor, and still required to labor. The milk dumping might end up bringing in the EPA as they have recently declared that milk is oil because of it’s fat content.
Thus far, I’ve visited Morningland four times since the embargo on the cheese and the recall notice. My main objective is to determine the definitive procedures and timelines, with a clear chain of command, from the agencies involved, that are necessary to clear Morningland for production. The clarification of this process would ensure agency accountability and delineate a specific course of action for Morningland to follow that would give them a reasonable expectation of being allowed to get back into production and distribution of their product. It seems I would have better luck nailing fresh Jell-o securely to the wall.
The FDA and the Missouri Milk Board are playing hot potato with explaining the process. The FDA says that the Milk Board and state of Missouri are responsible for the decision that will allow Morningland to return to shipping in interstate commerce, yet the only reason for the FDA’s presence is interstate commerce. The Milk Board says that the decision must be made by committee including the inspector, his supervisor, the State Veterinarian, two microbiologists from Jefferson City, and the FDA. All discussion of procedure is couched by terms like “normally”, “usually”, “I think”, “we’ll have to see” and “probably”. The process of being cleared is as clear as mud.
So right now, the FDA is awaiting results from the swab tests they did of the cheese plant and the legs of the milk bulk tank in the dairy barn last week. When those results are in, recommendations for clean up of the environment (if necessary) will be made, and then, should the Dixons want to test the 40# blocks of cheese in their cooler, they can. However, the Milk Board says that “due to statistical probability” if Morningland tests their cheese inventory and the tests come back showing clean product, those tests are not considered official. So there is no guarantee that Morningland will be able to ship the cheese at all. It depends on whether or not “the committee” and the FDA agree that the product is ‘safe for human consumption’. The products produced by Morningland are all ‘suspect’ for adulteration by FDA definition. FDA’s definition is so broad that according to information on the FDA’s own website, all food could be considered adulterated. [Look under Legal Aspects at the previous link (4) and you will find this: “Hence, to be adulterated, food need not be shown actually to contain filth or other contaminants; a demonstration that the food was prepared, packed, or held under conditions whereby it would, with reasonable possibility emphasis added, become so is legally sufficient to prove adulteration and provide grounds for taking action against the lot”].
When one considers the FDA’s documented opposition to raw dairy, and this most sensational germophobic testimony of John Sheehan (head of the Plant and Dairy division of the FDA that oversees cheese plants like Morningland) and then the cooperative agreements, the Memoranda of Understanding (MOU’s), the guidance documents between state and federal agencies along with the federal Food Code and the initiatives outlined therein, the likelihood of Morningland being declared “clear” and moving forward without continued harassment is slim.
Remember that there is an inspection process that is ongoing in both the milk barn and the cheese plant on Morningland’s property. The milk barn must be inspected, and the cheese plant must be inspected. In my experience, if an inspector wants to find a problem, he most certainly will. The number of flaming hoops that Morningland must jump through to be re-approved for full operation are currently indefinite and could be nearly infinite.
Stepping back from the particulars surrounding the Morningland Dairy, and another Missouri fresh milk dairy under prosecution, we must look at the agency objectives revealed in their Food Code, their Motion to Dismiss response in a raw milk suit brought against them, their Healthy People 2020 program, and the international standards and guidelines of the World Animal Health Organization (OIE), Codex Alimentarius and International Plant Protection Convention(OIE) that are embedded in Senate Bill 510 to ascertain what kind of regulations S510 will allow the FDA to write to ”protect” the food supply. Senate Bill 510 will expand the authority of the FDA beyond any common sense; and I believe they’ve already illustrated they lack common sense.
What we have here is the continued destruction of food freedom, food choice and food availability. The federal government does not believe that people are capable of deciding what to eat themselves and have “erected a multitude of New Offices and sent forth swarms of officers to harass our people and eat out their substance”. Literally. That citation from the Declaration of Independence couldn’t possibly have been more true at any time in history than it is today. Remember, no farmers, no food.

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

GMO's and Effects

2010-09-04T07:43:00.000-07:00

The following article can be found here

I think this is an excellent piece for getting info into people's hands that are not generally too concerned about ag or food in general. The issue is terrifically important as things continue to head to further consolidation and destruction of truly healthful food.

More on that later!

====
India Monsanto farmer in a fieldIndia is in the midst of a flood of suicides among farmers. A new feature film written and directed by Anusha Rizwi and produced by Bollywood megastar Aamir Khan, called Peepli Live, takes a look at this grim topic.

The vast majority of people in India still farm for a living, but are caught between deep debt and the erratic nature of seasonal change.

Indian farmers are pressured into mortgaging their farms to purchase genetically modified seeds, pesticides, and fertilizer from American companies like Monsanto.

According to AlterNet:

“Since GM seeds are patented by Monsanto, their repeated use each year requires constant licensing fees that keep farmers impoverished. One bad yield due to drought or other reasons, plunges farmers so deep into debt that they resort to suicide. One study estimates that 150,000 farmers have killed themselves in the past ten years.”

Meanwhile, in the U.S., District Judge Jeffrey White, a federal judge in California, has banned the planting of genetically modified Roundup Ready sugar beets created by Monsanto. The beets are engineered to withstand Monsanto’s Roundup weed killer.

White said he was “troubled by maintaining the status quo that consists of 95 percent of sugar beets being genetically engineered while [the USDA] conducts the environmental review that should have occurred before the sugar beets were deregulated.”

The ban does not affect crops already planted and harvested for sugar.

The St. Louis Business Journal reports:

“Environmental groups ... filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in January 2008 to challenge the deregulation of Roundup Ready sugar beets by the USDA ... Opponents say the beets promote superweeds, weeds that cannot easily be killed because they have developed a tolerance to weed killer. They also raise concerns about the contamination of conventional and organic crops.”

Sources:
AlterNet August 16, 2010
St. Louis Business Journal August 16, 2010

Dr. Mercola's Comments:

Follow me on twitter Follow me on facebook

I believe genetically modified plants and foods are one of the most significant threats against humanity and life on this planet, for a number of reasons.

Biotechnology has changed the face of farming as we know it, and with each passing year, we move further away from the ancient farming practice of saving the best seeds for replanting the following season – a method that is both inexpensive and proven successful for optimal crop quality.

Now, the increased use of genetically modified seeds that must be purchased anew each year are starting to take its toll. A mere 15 years into commercial GM seed use, we’re now seeing GM crops contaminating conventional and organic crops; different GM varieties combining with each other in the wild, creating unintended GM hybrids; and farmers driven to desperate acts due to financial devastation.

Genetic Engineering May Sterilize Nature. Then What?

Consider this: Monsanto’s “suicide gene” has not only been inserted into certain food crops, rendering them sterile in order to force farmers to buy new seeds. This technology is now spreading to other industries, such as forestry.

Scientific American reported on this in January. Two paper industry giants are planning to replace the native pine in the forests of southwestern US with genetically engineered, sterile, eucalyptus. By making the trees unable to reproduce naturally, they propose there’s no need to worry about the GM eucalyptus turning into an invasive species…

Really?

Earlier this week I wrote about two GM varieties of canola spreading into the wild, and cross-breeding with each other, creating a third hybrid that is resistant to not one but two herbicides. Science has already discovered that the genome is more “intelligent” than previously thought, and by planting non-native trees that have been gene spliced to reduce proliferation does NOT make me rest easy.

On the contrary. I believe there are plenty of indications that the introduction of sterile plants of various kinds may allow this genetic ability to “turn off” reproductive capability to spread into other parts of nature, in ways that none of us can predict.

For an eye opening look at the genetic engineering now overtaking the forestry industry, I highly recommend watching the documentary film “A Silent Forest,” available in full on MEFEEDiA.com.

How are GM Crops Provoking Farmers to Commit Suicide?

According to the National Crime Records Bureau of India, more than 182,900 Indian farmers took their own lives between 1997 and 2007. It estimates 46 Indian farmers commit suicide every day. That equates to roughly one suicide every 30 minutes!

Some will argue that natural events are to blame, such as lack of rain, but crop failures have occurred before, and it didn’t push thousands of farmers to end their lives by drinking pesticide.

No, the increased desperation can be traced directly back to the use of patented, and therefore expensive, seeds, and the unconscionable tactics of Monsanto.

Monsanto has been ruthless in their drive to use India as a testing ground for genetically modified crops. Over the past decade, millions of Indian farmers have been promised radically increased harvests and income if they switch from their traditional age tested farming methods to genetically modified (GM) Bt cotton seeds.

So, they borrow money to buy GM seeds, which need certain pesticides that were previously unnecessary, which requires even more money. When rain fall is sparse, the GM crops actually fare far worse than traditional crops – a fact that these farmers oftentimes don’t learn until it’s too late and they’re standing there with failed crops, spiraling debts, and no income.

And by next season, they have to do it all over again because the GM seeds cannot be saved and replanted. They must be purchased again.

In addition, GM crops have spawned:

* Bt resistant pests
* New pests
* Superweeds

For example, the evolution of Bt resistant bollworms worldwide have now been confirmed and documented, and what used to be minor pests are now becoming major problems – such as mirid bugs, which have increased 12-fold since 1997 in China, and can be directly linked to the scale of China’s Bt cotton cultivation.

In addition, the promise that GM crops would reduce pesticide/herbicide use has turned out to be entirely false.

The use of Roundup herbicide has increased dramatically since the GM Roundup Ready crops were introduced. In the first 13 years, American farmers sprayed an additional 383 million pounds of herbicide due to these herbicide-tolerant crops. And now the repeated exposures have given Mother Nature all she needs to stage her comeback in the form of devastating superweeds.

Since 1996, when GM crops were first introduced, at least nine species of U.S. weeds have developed resistance to glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup herbicide, which means farmers must use additional herbicides, some of them even more toxic than Roundup.

In the end, we’re left with all of the downsides and none of the intended benefits.

Bollywood Brings Indian Farmers’ Plight to the Big Screen

AlterNet.com reports on a new Indian film called Peepli Live that grapples with this topic:

“The story is set in an Indian village named Peepli where one young debt-burdened farmer named Natha is talked into taking his own life after he learns that his family will be financially compensated through a government program created to alleviate the loss of farmers taking their own lives.”

The film features Bollywood megastar Aamir Khan. An interview with him about the film and the plight of Indian farmers can be found here.

Hopefully this film is successful in raising awareness about the destructive power of this technology.

US Judge Halts Deregulation of Roundup Ready Sugar Beets – For Now…

Meanwhile, the US has been granted a temporary reprieve from yet another GM food.

The U.S. District Judge Jeffrey White, a federal judge in California, recently banned the planting of Monsanto’s GM Roundup-resistant sugar beets. The ruling, which can be read here, does not affect any crop that has already been planted or harvested, however, so GM sugar will still reach the market place.

The GM sugar beet is called Genuity, and was introduced during the 2008-2009 season.

Although considered a victory, the judge’s ruling did not grant plaintiffs’ motion for a permanent injunction against GM sugar beet plantings.

The St Louis Business Journal recently reported:

“White ruled in September 2009 that the USDA will have to complete an Environmental Impact Statement for the sugar beets. The USDA has estimated that an EIS may be ready by 2012.

Monsanto has said in court papers that revoking regulators' approval of sugar beets would cost the biotech giant and its customers approximately $2 billion in 2011 and 2012.”

Roundup Residue Causes Cell Damage

The increasing use of Roundup on crops engineered to survive being doused in the herbicide has its own set of health consequences.

Residues of Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide found in GM food and feed has been linked to cell damage and even death, even at very low levels. Researchers have also found it causes membrane and DNA damage, and inhibits cell respiration.

So not only are you exposed to foods that contain built-in toxins, you’re also consuming larger amounts of toxic residues on the food, for the simple fact that more is now being used.

Pesticide and herbicide residues are very difficult to remove from grains, fruits and vegetables. Even meticulous washing cannot get rid of it all.

What Can You Do to Affect Change?

Did you know that genetically modified foods are so prevalent in the US that if you randomly pick an item off your grocery store's shelves, you have a 75 percent chance of picking a food with GM ingredients?

It’s true. At least seven out of every 10 food items have been genetically modified, and there’s more to come.

The potential health ramifications of these world-wide experiments with our food supply are frightening to say the least. If you care about the health and future of your family, I strongly urge you to refuse to participate in this destructive trend.

How?

It’s actually simpler than you might think... By buying only non-GM foods.

Must-Have Guide to NON-GMO Foods

The True Food Shopping Guide is a great tool for helping you determine which brands and products contain GM ingredients. It lists 20 different food categories that include everything from baby food to chocolate.

Additionally, here are four simple steps to decrease your consumption of GM foods as much as possible:

* Reduce or eliminate processed foods in your diet. The fact that 75 percent of processed foods contain GM ingredients is only one of the many reasons to stick to a whole foods diet.
* Read produce and food labels. Conventionally raised soybeans and corn make up the largest portion of genetically modified crops. Ingredients made from these foods include high fructose corn syrup (HFCS), corn flour and meal, dextrin, starch, soy sauce, margarine, and tofu.
* Buy organic produce. By definition, food that is certified organic must be free from all GM organisms, produced without artificial pesticides and fertilizers and from an animal reared without the routine use of antibiotics, growth promoters or other drugs. Additionally, grass-fed beef will not have been fed GM corn feed.

An Obvious Criminal Enterprise

2010-08-11T05:11:00.000-07:00

Oregon Health Department Food Nazis Assail Lemonade Stand!

Seven-year-old Julie Murphy of Oregon City still smiles about her enterprise despite running afoul of county inspectors for an unlicensed lemonade stand at Last Thursday.

UPDATE: Multnomah County chairman tells inspectors to stand down and apologizes to Julie and her family.

It's hardly unusual to hear small-business owners gripe about licensing requirements or complain that heavy-handed regulations are driving them into the red.

So when Multnomah County shut down an enterprise last week for operating without a license, you might just sigh and say, there they go again.

Except this entrepreneur was a 7-year-old named Julie Murphy. Her business was a lemonade stand at the Last Thursday monthly art fair in Northeast Portland. The government regulation she violated? Failing to get a $120 temporary restaurant license.

Turns out that kids' lemonade stands -- those constants of summertime -- are supposed to get a permit in Oregon, particularly at big events that happen to be patrolled regularly by county health inspectors.

"I understand the reason behind what they're doing and it's a neighborhood event, and they're trying to generate revenue," said Jon Kawaguchi, environmental health supervisor for the Multnomah County Health Department. "But we still need to put the public's health first."

Julie had become enamored of the idea of having a stand after watching an episode of cartoon pig Olivia running one, said her mother, Maria Fife. The two live in Oregon City, but Fife knew her daughter would get few customers if she set up her stand at home.

Plus, Fife had just attended Last Thursday along Portland's Northeast Alberta Street for the first time and loved the friendly feel and the diversity of the grass-roots event. She put the two things together and promised to take her daughter in July.

The girl worked on a sign, coloring in the letters and decorating it with a drawing of a person saying "Yummy." She made a list of supplies.

Then, with gallons of bottled water and packets of Kool-Aid, they drove up last Thursday with a friend and her daughter. They loaded a wheelbarrow that Julie steered to the corner of Northeast 26th and Alberta and settled into a space between a painter and a couple who sold handmade bags and kids' clothing.

Even before her daughter had finished making the first batch of lemonade, a man walked up to buy a 50-cent cup.

"They wanted to support a little 7-year-old to earn a little extra summer loot," she said. "People know what's going on."

Even so, Julie was careful about making the lemonade, cleaning her hands with hand sanitizer, using a scoop for the bagged ice and keeping everything covered when it wasn't in use, Fife said.

After 20 minutes, a "lady with a clipboard" came over and asked for their license. When Fife explained they didn't have one, the woman told them they would need to leave or possibly face a $500 fine.

Surprised, Fife started to pack up. The people staffing the booths next to them encouraged the two to stay, telling them the inspectors had no right to kick them out of the neighborhood gathering. They also suggested that they give away the lemonade and accept donations instead and one of them made an announcement to the crowd to support the lemonade stand.

That's when business really picked up -- and two inspectors came back, Fife said. Julie started crying, while her mother packed up and others confronted the inspectors. "It was a very big scene," Fife said.

Technically, any lemonade stand -- even one on your front lawn -- must be licensed under state law, said Eric Pippert, the food-borne illness prevention program manager for the state's public health division. But county inspectors are unlikely to go after kids selling lemonade on their front lawn unless, he conceded, their front lawn happens to be on Alberta Street during Last Thursday.

"When you go to a public event and set up shop, you're suddenly engaging in commerce," he said. "The fact that you're small-scale I don't think is relevant."

Kawaguchi, who oversees the two county inspectors involved, said they must be fair and consistent in their monitoring, no matter the age of the person. "Our role is to protect the public," he said.

The county's shutdown of the lemonade stand was publicized by Michael Franklin, the man at the booth next to Fife and her daughter. Franklin contributes to the Bottom Up Radio Network, an online anarchist site, and interviewed Fife for his show.

Franklin is also organizing a "Lemonade Revolt" for Last Thursday in August. He's calling on anarchists, neighbors and others to come early for the event and grab space for lemonade stands on Alberta between Northeast 25th and Northeast 26th.

As for Julie, the 7-year-old still tells her mother "it was a bad day." When she complains about the health inspector, Fife reminds her that the woman was just doing her job. She also promised to help her try again -- at an upcoming neighborhood garage sale.

While Fife said she does see the need for some food safety regulation, she thinks the county went too far in trying to control events as unstructured as Last Thursday.

"As far as Last Thursday is concerned, people know when they are coming there that it's more or less a free-for-all," she said. "It's gotten to the point where they need to be in all of our decisions. They don't trust us to make good choices on our own."

-- Helen Jung

US Senate Candidate Chuck Purgason... the Longest Missouri Filibuster!

2010-07-14T04:17:00.000-07:00

The State Senator who has already proven that he will stand against immense political pressure to compromise freedom principles, is taking a tremendous stand right now. He ran the NAIS constraining legislation in Missouri and took unbelievable flack from proponents of NAIS and would not back down. Now he won't back down on a deceptively named bill that has had a lot of political intrigue behind it.

The "Manufacturing Jobs Act" is a bill that tries to bribe Ford Motor Company to stay here, even though Ford hasn't asked for a bribe, nor have they testified for the bribe. This is a Missouri attempt at following Federal economic policy, and Purgason is filibustering in this special session "till he drops" to stop this bill. What that means, is he went for more than 20 hours.

A little history on this bill indicates that there must be some push from on high in the Republican leadership in Missouri. In regular session, this bill was filibustered and dropped. At nearly the end of session, Missouri's Democratic Governor, Jay Nixon visited the President Pro Tem of the Senate at his office for a 45 minute closed door meeting with armed guards stationed outside. After that meeting, there was a Special Session called by the Governor.

Now,I am not clear on all the rules regarding irregular legislative processes, but I know enough to recognize untoward party and leadership pressure. Purgason was removed from his Chairmanship of the Government Accountability and Fiscal Oversight Committee by the President Pro Tem of the Senate because Purgason wouldn't bring the bill to a vote.....Remember this bill died in regular session.

Prior to removing Purgason as Chair and installing himself as Chair, the President of the Senate, Charlie Shields had a 45 minute meeting at the end of regular session with Democratic Governor Jay Nixon, who really wants this bill....Neither one of them, nor the armed guards outside of Shields' office, said what transpired in the meeting. But a Special Session was agreed upon.

During the Special Session, on the House side of things, House President Pro Tem, Bryan Pratt (who referred to the bill as a bail out bill) and Representative Kraus were removed and replaced from the Committee the bill had to go through to make it to House floor.

So, strong arm tactics with leadership in both parties pushing hard for the same legislation that is highly questionable, seems indicative of something seriously wrong in the General Assembly at least.....It would be my guess that if one were able to follow the money, it would go back to the powers behind the parties. It would take a good long while to chase that bunny down the trail, but the behaviour of the leadership strongly suggests that there is a bunny to run down.

Farmer's Killing Themselves --

2010-07-03T09:33:00.000-07:00

The article below brushes the surface of the problems faced on the farm. Farmers are the most pro-life bunch of people you will encounter. The hopelessness resulting from market control and lack of access to viable markets is multiplying....Be a revolutionary and buy direct from a farmer. ....

Need a Real Sponsor here

July 26, 2009, 8:17 AM ET
The Human Toll: Farmer Suicides on the Rise

Fluctuations in oil prices over the last couple years have received no shortage of headlines, but they’re not the only commodity that has seen an increase – followed by a collapse – in prices. The same has happened in agriculture, and the impact of sharply lower prices combined with weak demand and tight credit is taking a devastating toll on farmers.

http://online.wsj.com/media/dairy_D_20090726081231.jpg

In Colorado, for example, 14 farmers and ranchers took their lives last year, double the rate five years ago, according to the Denver Post. In Maine, the Bangor Daily News has reported of at least three known farmer suicides so far this year. Two dairy famers in California have taken their lives in the last six months. The Iowa-based “Sowing the Seeds of Hope” hotline, which serves farmers in seven Midwest states, has fielded about 11,000 calls through April, a 20% increase from the same period a year ago, according to the Post and the Iowa Independent.

“The increase in calls really started with the change in dairy prices, as they fell last fall,” Mike Rosmann, a clinical psychologist and farmer who heads the hotline jointly sponsored by AgriWellness and Iowa State University Extension, told the Post.

Scott Hoese, a Minnesota dairy farmer, described the industry’s struggles in testimony before the House Agriculture Subcommittee on Livestock, Dairy & Poultry on Tuesday.

“Dairy farmers of all sizes and across all regions of the country are enduring an unprecedented disaster,” he said. “Equity is rapidly disappearing, market prices remain at 1970 levels, creditors are cutting off producers - yet there is no relief in sight.”

“As quickly as dairy prices peaked last year, they have just as quickly collapsed and have been well below the cost of production,” he said. “Our latest data shows consumers paying $4.99 for a pound of cheddar cheese while the farmer receives less than $1.00; farmers receive $0.97 out of the $2.99 consumers pay for a gallon of fat free milk. At a time when more consumers are eating at home, thereby increasing retail dairy product sales, producers are losing money on every gallon of milk sold.”

The global nature of the current downturn has also taken a toll, he said, wiping out other nations’ demand for U.S. agricultural exports. “Time is of the essence for dairy producers. Many continue to lose $100-$200 per dairy cow per month with no immediate increase in the market on the horizon,” he said. “As a producer, it has been frustrating, to say the least, to weather one of the worst economic periods in 30 years yet it seems as though our society as a whole has not grasped how desperate our situation is.”

Copyright 2008 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Consolidation GMO's and Food Control--The Theater we are in

2010-06-05T15:10:00.000-07:00

Please go to the Center for Responsible Technology and download the non-GMO shopping guide. Jeffrey Smith has done the most work on this and you can benefit from the tremendous amount of work he has done. I don't agree with him that the Obama Administration is going to 'do the right thing' with labeling, or constraint of market control on ag at all---But his work is STILL the best out there. So get the Non GMO shopping guide at the bottom of the linked page.

Also, please support my weekly radio show. As you can tell from reading my blog, I am much more comfortable with duct tape and hammers than internet technology, but that lack of ability in techno crud doesn't stop me from being able to access information and process it....it just stops me from being able to disseminate that information as well as I would like. I'm going to continue to try to get the info out there, but I'm a little needy and need to know that people are getting it. So please listen to the show when you can and call in with your thoughts from time to time. Here's the link to my most recent broadcast of Truth Farmer on Liberty News Radio

Tomorrow morning from 8-9 Central I will be on Republic Broadcasting networks Capitol Forum, and Monday at 8pm Central I will be on Devvy Kidd's show.

I do this stuff full time for free---all in the hope that we may continue to be able to eat and to stand in the gap so that tyrranny has a harder time bringing us to their Brave New World. I like my Brave New World better as fiction. How about you?

Name Games with the USDA (again)

2010-05-20T06:11:00.000-07:00

©Doreen Hannes

On May 11th, the USDA held the first of three public meetings on their "New NAIS" program "Animal Disease Traceability". The meeting began at 8am with three power point presentations. California State Veterinarian, Dr. Richard Breitmeyer gave the first presentation. This was the same presentation he gave at the mid-March NIAA (National Institute of Animal Agriculture) meeting, also held in Kansas City.

A little history is in order to understand the progression of this idea for animal traceability. In the US, the first notable plan for identifying animals was the NFAIP, along with FAIR, those being the National Farm Animal Identification Program and Farm Animal Identification and Records. Then under the Bush Administration there was the United States Animal Identification Plan, with the NAIS, National Animal Identification System hot on it's heels. Now, they have "killed" NAIS, but are moving forward with the Animal Disease Traceability plan, the ADT. The main difference here is that the USDA is going to make a rule on the ADT to prescribe the "performance standards" for traceability that the states MUST meet to engage in interstate commerce with the ADT.

Breitmeyer's presentation focused on the difficulties around tracing the contacts of tubercular (and suspect) cattle in the state of California and other states without the aid of an interoperable database covering all animals and all movements. According to his presentation, the state of California has approximately 57,500 known live cattle imports from Mexico per year. This is significant in that more than 75% of all tuberculosis in cattle is of Mexican origin. Breitmeyer lamented that when he began as a vet 25 years ago, the US had nearly eliminated TB except for in small areas of northern Michigan and northern Minnesota where the soil make up continues to keep TB in the wildlife and therefore occasionally in cattle. Breitmeyer's presentation was actually quite a good illustration of many of the failed policies of the USDA in disease control, the lack of quarantine at the borders chief among them. Of course, he is a proponent of a NAIS style system because having all that data available would make his job easier…At least on paper.

The second presentation was given by a very soft-spoken APHIS/VS (Veternary Services) representative, Dr. TJ Mayer. He stressed that the "theme" for the development of the "new" program is "collaboration". Those to be affected must be involved in the process of developing the solution for the lack of traceability that now exists--- particularly in cattle. Cattle are the primary focus for this new plan, and the methodology for bringing cattle to 95% traceability back to the point of identification in 2 business days is dependent on "collaboration" in developing the processes in our states. (Sounds familiar, doesn't it?) Mayer also illustrated that the desired traceability would be implemented gradually through partnerships of stakeholders and building upon the requirements outlined in the rule that is to be developed for criteria that states must meet for interstate commerce.

The third presentation was by Becky Brewer (Oklahoma State Vet) and the apparent lead member of the newly established "Regulatory Working Group". Dr. Brewer related the thinking of the Regulatory Working Group on the measurable outcomes of the 'traceability' standards to arrive at 95% of "all" animals traced back to the 'traceability unit' within 2 business days. Sounds just like the NAIS Business Plan, doesn't it? Brewer stated, "In government speak, "all" doesn't mean all." This may explain why the USDA kept insisting that when opponents of NAIS cited documents verbatim, we were "spreading misinformation". Evidently the English language is a linguistic and statistical anomaly in the hands and mouths of bureaucrats.

There were no question and answer sessions after the presentations. Instead every table was given a USDA facilitator and three segments of questions to answer regarding how we might achieve the desired outcome of getting animals id'd back to the 'traceability unit' within their timeframes. The tables were marked with species placards and there were at least five cattle tables, three swine, two poultry, one sheep and goat, and one "other species".

When I entered the room I noticed that Kenny Fox of R CALF USA was at a cattle table and I failed to notice the "other species" table so I sat at the sheep and goat table. There were no people at the poultry tables. The cattle tables were quite full, and all of the reporters were sitting at the 'other species' table, so I thought I would just sit at the empty sheep and goat table.

When the facilitating began, I was blessed with three USDA representatives at my table, where all the other tables only had one. I shared the table with one sheep broker from New Mexico. He deals in 20 to 30,000 head of sheep annually mostly exported to Mexico and was quite content with the Scrapie program. This program identifies breeding animals back to the flock of origin with a number assigned to the flock manager and not the land the animals are held on. It also allows for tattoos as an alternate form of official id for interstate commerce, and does not use RFID tags, although it could in the future.

The USDA representatives at my table were not particularly interested in hearing about how the failed agricultural policies have created a problem that the USDA would now like all of us to 'partner' with them to solve. They did take copious notes, and were quite proficient in 'mirroring' my statements while slightly adjusting them to fit their desired outcome more handily.

At the end of each of the three segments, a representative from each table stood and gave the 'report' from the table on that segment. The consensus of the cattle groups were that only breeders should be identified, RFID tags should be avoided, back tags should continue to be used for feeders and slaughter cows, and a NAIS styled system would not work at all.

The USDA is currently promoting the use of 'bright' tags for cattle. These are very similar to brucellosis tags in numbering and appearance. However, when the only question and answer segment of the day took place and Neil Hammerschmidt (one of the main authors of NAIS) gave most of the answers, he made it clear that the USDA still wants to 'aggressively' pursue the use of 840 tags.

The bottom line about the entire meeting is that the USDA will try to have a draft rule ready in June from the "Regulatory Working Group". This rule will define the "performance standards" that are to be met by the states to engage in interstate commerce. The USDA plans to publish this proposed rule in November or December of 2010, allow a 90-day comment period, and finalize the rule (make it law) from 8-10 months after the comment period is complete. There may be different requirements under these performance standards by species, and some potentially exempted sectors or movements. There is admitted concern from the USDA and their friends that incentives and disincentives for states must be expressed clearly and not be too "heavy handed". In other words, if a state meets compliance levels in hogs and not cattle, the hogs should not be refused access to interstate commerce.

It appears to me that we must proactively engage our state legislators to statutorily define requirements for interstate livestock movement and not allow the Departments of Agriculture the leeway to cooperate with the USDA to achieve the goals of the USDA as those goals are still NAIS oriented. The USDA will not dismantle the National Premises Repository although Hammerschmidt stated that if a state were to want to withdraw all of their participants, they could do so. Also, according to Hammerschmidt, they still want to move 'aggressively' to 840 tags as official identification along with electronic Certificates of Veterinary Inspection.

The onus of implementing the graduated Animal Disease Traceability program rests squarely on the individual states. Either the states will define those standards statutorily or the USDA will bring about their final desires incrementally through the regulatory process.==========

And by the way.....

2010-05-17T21:59:00.000-07:00

Just in case anyone was curious, I write from time to time for News with Views and have a weekly radio show on Liberty News Radio every Saturday from 10 to 11am....In between, I do laundry, garden,dishes, cooking (although I would rather raise the food than cook it!) manage a farm, home school, bake bread, make cheese and fight for truth, freedom and fluffy pancakes.

And in my spare time, I try to figure out how technology can be used for good and not evil!

Missouri Set to Get Ohio's Issue 2---Act now!

2010-05-07T21:47:00.000-07:00

For those in Missouri, we need to get on this!

We have only a few days left in session at Jefferson City. We have a very, very negative bill looking to go through the Senate and we have got to get active against it or be faced with a myriad of committees acting like the "Milk Board" and telling us all what we have to do, how we must do it, and when in order to remain engaged in agriculture.

SB 795 is the Omnibus Ag Act, and it is compilation of a lot of good intentions gone awry. The good bits cannot be separated from the bad bits at this point.

This bill is a serious affront to anyone who loves freedom...To be ruled by non-elected unaccountable committees is actually a Soviet system of governance, and SB 795 sets that up in agriculture quite succinctly. While there are tremendous concerns with the food supply and it's safety for consumption, as well as the attempts by the HSUS to control how animals are raised (with their real intent to STOP all animal ownership as the final goal), the oversight to be established by LAW in Missouri via SB 795 is completely unacceptable. Warm fuzzy language aside, the establishment of committees dominated by corporate ag will hasten the destruction to independent agriculture that the policies employed by the USDA for decades have caused.

The bill does the following, with all of the agency authority to promulgate rules and regulations behind it:

Sets up a committee of major agribusiness proponents to establish 'acceptable' animal care standards. This is Ohio's Issue 2, just in Missouri instead.

Sets up a committee to oversee "Urban Agriculture".

Sets up a misdirected attempt to further local food producers access to market by establishing a "sustainable" "farm to institution" initiative ---WITH the authority to promulgate rules and regulations regarding the initiative. There is concern that the committee establishing the guidelines for 'animal care' will have oversight of this program as well and the group pushing for this initiative would like the bill killed as it has been 'adulterated'.

Establishes in law the 'right to own animals' so long as they are raised in accordance with 'standards' set by the University of Missouri. This section also seriously threatens local control and private property rights.

Establishes licensing requirements for egg selling.

Establishes very complex licensing requirements for 'blasters' with a highly specific exemption list that does -NOT- clearly preclude reloaders as exempt from licensing requirements.

It also establishes horse slaughter and provides highly specific requirements for engagement in that activity. One of the requirements is that should someone purchase more than 5 pounds of horse meat, the seller must take their name address and contact information and hold that for disclosure to an interested authority.

It also does a few other things, but overall, this bill is very unfriendly to freedom and it fails to meaningfully address the real issues that cause agriculture to be a difficult field to negotiate a viable living through.

If you love freedom or good food, or farming, you need to oppose this bill and oppose it quickly. The last week of session begins on Monday the 10th and the Citizens of Missouri would be better off with this bill being killed than if it passes.

Please call the Senate and tell them to vote NO on SB795 and stop all these committees and task forces from being established in statute and ruling how independent agriculture can conduct itself. Let's fight HSUS with facts instead of letting further consolidation of agriculture markets occur because we are afraid of this bunch of Horribly Sadistic Urban Sociopaths.

Find the Senate roster at and let's fill up the answering machines and continue to call all week until they vote SB795 down!

In Liberty,

Doreen

Genetically Modified Cows Die…

2010-05-05T13:08:00.000-07:00

Yes, you read that right. Not cows that ATE GMO's, but GMO cows themselves…….And hey, even better, they were crossed with humans!!! I know, people say that isn't actually happening, but in reality, which is inevitably stranger than fiction, it has been happening for quite awhile. The following article doesn't go into the history, just reports what has happened with some of these cattle.

http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/7141902/genetically-modified-cows-die-at-research-centre/

Three genetically modified cows born at the AgResearch centre at Ruakura, Hamilton, were born with ovaries that grew so large they caused ruptures and killed them.

The animals being used in a study in which AgResearch scientists were seeking human fertility treatments through GM cows' milk.

AgResearch was now studying tissue from one of the three dead calves to try to find out what made the ovaries grow to the size of tennis balls rather than the usual thumbnail-size, the Weekend Herald reported today.

The newspaper obtained details of the deaths in an Official Information Act request and said it had reignited debate over the ethics of GM trials on animals.

AgResearch's applied technologies group manager, Dr Jimmy Suttie, said the deaths were not a big deal and told the newspaper they were part of the learning process for scientists.

However, GE-Free NZ spokesman Jon Carapiet told the newspaper details of the calf trial showed the animal welfare committee overseeing AgResearch's work was "miles away from the ethics and values of the community".

The calves died last year, aged six months.

They were formed when human genetic code injected into a cow cell was added to an egg from a cow's ovary and put into a cow's uterus.
It was part of an experiment to see if the genetic code would enable the cows that were produced to produce milk containing compounds that could be used as a human fertility treatment.

It's Official- The FDA Believes we Are Too Dumb to Eat

2010-04-30T11:02:00.000-07:00

©Doreen Hannes

The Farm to Consumer Legal Defense Fund (FTCLDF- www.farmtoconsumer.org) has achieved a tremendous coup in their suit against the FDA regarding the FDA's abuses over transport of privately owned fresh (unpasteurized) milk. In a brief the FDA filed requesting that the case against them be dismissed for lack of standing, the FDA has shown that they truly think we cannot decide what we want to eat or drink without their permission. It's amazing. One would think that we could not have possibly lived prior to the formation of the FDA just over one hundred years ago.

The legal brief by the FDA actually has the audacity to proclaim in the table of contents such things as :

There is No Right to Consume or Feed Children Any Particular Food (pg25)

There is No Generalized Right to Bodily and Physical Health. (pg26)

There is No Fundamental Right to Freedom of Contract (pg 27)

FDA’s Regulations Rationally Advance The Agency’s Public Health Mission (pg27)

Let's have a look at the first citation above… (emphasis added) beginning on page 25…

…… there is no “deeply rooted” historical tradition of unfettered access to
food of all kinds….To the contrary, society’s long history of food regulation stretches back to the dietary laws of biblical times…. Modern food safety regulation in the United States has its roots in the early food laws of the American colonies, which themselves incorporated “the tradition of food regulation established in England.” …(-citing a Virginia statute passed in 1873, that “made it an offense . . . [to] knowingly, sell, supply, or bring to be manufactured . . . milk from which any cream has been taken; or milk commonly known as skimmed milk”). Comprehensive federal regulation of the food supply has been in effect at least since Congress enacted the Pure Food and Drugs Act of 1906, and was strengthened by the passage of the FDCA in 1938. Thus, plaintiffs’ claim to a fundamental privacy interest in obtaining “foods of their own choice” for themselves and their families is without merit.

If this weren't so horribly serious it would be hilarious.

The FDA is fighting a case that builds on the desire and right to consume fresh (unpasteurized) milk, which the FDA maintains is a lethally dangerous practice, by citing a law that prohibits any change of the nature of fresh milk!

But wait, there's more….we haven't begun to scratch the surface yet:

There is No Generalized Right to Bodily and Physical Health.

Plaintiffs’ assertion of a “fundamental right to their own bodily and physical
health, which includes what foods they do and do not choose to consume for
themselves and their families” is similarly unavailing because plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to obtain any food they wish. (Emphasis added)

I almost can not believe they were so overt in their complete and total disregard for the most fundamental human right of all, yet their own words convict them. If you cannot decide what food you wish to eat, you certainly cannot even entertain the idea that you are free! The FDA has seemingly vaunted itself to the level of parenthood over the entire nation simply by being created via an act of Congress. Like a parent telling a four year old, "Eat it! It's good for you!" Right…..Never mind the fact that the FDA has refused to do any real testing on genetically modified foods, or that they say aspartame is fine for you to drink when it becomes toxic at 85 degrees. Don't even mention that they have refused to regulate nanofoods (smaller than a molecule technologic creations) that your body cannot assimilate. Yet since you don't have any "generalized right to bodily and physical health" they can allow you to be poisoned with the continued blessing of Congress. And the likely passage of new powers to be given to the FDA will surely be helpful in giving us all "food safety" and healthful food. Right. Sorry, my sarcasm should be palpable.

According to the FDA, you don't have a right to bodily and physical health by deciding what you want to eat or don't want to eat. They know better than you, even better than God Almighty and don't you forget it. Just wait until they have expanded powers under S510 and HR2749. They will almost certainly extrapolate that authority to do home refrigerator checks on whomever they want.

In their final sentence under this section of the FDA's motion to dismiss, they really hit it out of the park:

Finally, even if such a right did exist, it would not render FDA’s regulations unconstitutional because prohibiting the interstate sale and distribution of unpasteurized milk promotes “bodily and physical health.”

So you don't have a right to it and they are promoting your non-right by their illustrious actions……Please. There are a myriad of studies attesting to the healthful benefits of fresh milk. Yes, there are concerns associated with it as well, and people should do the best they can to become educated on the subject before making a decision for themselves, but this hyperbolic 'public good' claim is farcical at the least. Particularly when the FDA has so miserably failed in their charge to inspect processing facilities and imports. A recent Office of the Inspector General (OIG) report revealed that the FDA has inspected less than 25% of the facilities they are charged with inspecting in five years. They inspect LESS than 1% of imports and allow the aforementioned biotech and nanotech foods to enter the food supply without the slightest flinch on their part. All the while they proclaim they are performing a public good.

The final affront to all that is decent in this FDA legal brief follows:

There is No Fundamental Right to Freedom of Contract
In arguing that FDA’s regulations violate substantive due process because they
interfere with plaintiffs’ “contract rights” by “restricting the use of an agent to accomplish what the principal herself ought to be free to do,” plaintiffs ask this Court to resuscitate long-dead, Lochner-era jurisprudence. See Ferguson v. Skrupa,372 U.S. 726, 729 (1963) (“There was a time when the Due Process Clause was used by this Court to strike down laws which were thought . . . incompatible with some particular economic or social philosophy,” but that doctrine “has long since been discarded ). Plaintiffs anachronistic invitation should be rejected.

The excerpt above has deeper implications than one might realize at a glance. In my estimation it has a terrific amount to do with many of the obtuse rulings the state and federal courts have delivered. We are being told that we do not have the right to make agreements. Evidently, all agreements have been made for us by our superiors.

Historically, the only people without the right to contract are minors, felons and slaves. Obviously, we cannot be minors because we can never reach the age of majority wherein we are free to decide what we eat for ourselves. So we are either felons or slaves. Which category we have been relegated to is open for discussion, but we certainly are not free. To boldly state that we have no right to freedom of contract is an astonishing, and revealing, admission.

To boldly state any one of the cites above is astonishing. We have no right to decide what we eat or don't eat, we have no right to bodily and physical health, we have no right to contract, and the FDA is 'rational'. So saith the FDA…. in Case 5:10-cv-04018-MWB, Document 11-1 filed on 04/26/10.

The FDA believes that we are too stupid to swallow. Yet we are supposed to swallow that they are interested in securing a safe food supply for us, and that the FDA needs more power to regulate food on farms and we should give it to them by passing S510 or HR2749.

They'll take care of us…you betcha.

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

This article should be on www.newswithviews.com and have the pdf of the FDA motion to dismiss attached. I will make certain it is accessible and post an update when it can be downloaded easily. Meanwhile, if anyone has any idea how to get pdfs loaded onto blogspot---PLEASE let me know!

GMO-It's what's for Dinner!

2010-04-26T14:42:00.000-07:00

For those who are really enjoying better living through chemistry (ahem) this may seem like good news. For the rest of us, who want to eat tomatoes when we think we're eating tomatoes, this isn't good news at all....This is nice quick article on the most recent happenings from the feds on GMO's.

Feds on GMO Labeling: Don't Tell, Don't Ask
By Barry Estabrook

If you were hoping there might be some change in the U.S. government's official position on genetically modified and genetically engineered (GM/GE) foods under the Obama administration, tough luck.

Last month there was the appointment of big-time GM/GE advocate (and former Monsanto lobbyist) Islam Siddiqui to Office of the United States Trade Representative as the country's chief agricultural negotiator . Now comes a position paper from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that opposes labeling for genetically modified food. The U.S. claims that letting consumers know whether or not food contains GM/GE products is "false, misleading, or deceptive."

You read that correctly. In Obama Newspeak, telling the public the truth is false, misleading, or deceptive, while concealing facts is not. Incidentally, the language is identical to that used by previous administrations. How's that for change?

The policy prompted yowls of outrage form more than 80 organic, environmental, food-production, and public-health groups. They dispatched a letter earlier this week urging Michael Taylor, who is deputy commissioner for foods at the FDA, and Kathleen Merrigan, deputy secretary of agriculture, to reconsider (click here for a PDF). "We are concerned that the current U.S. position could potentially create serious problems for food processors in the U.S. who wish to indicate that their products contain no GE ingredients, including on organic food," the letter said.

The administration intends to argue its position at a meeting of the Codex Committee on Food Labeling, a United Nations body that sets labeling rules for food in international trade. Codex will be meeting from May 3 to May 7 in Quebec City. The government feels Codex should not "suggest or imply that GM/GE foods are in any way different from other foods."

"The agenda of the biotech industry is that if consumers don't know about it, they will eat it," said Patty Lovera, assistant director of Washington, D. C.-based Food and Water Watch. "Our government shouldn't be carrying the water for the biotech industry, a group that tries not to let the public know what it is doing."

The new policy directly contradicts the USDA's current organic regulations, the groups point out in the letter. USDA organic rules prohibit modified seeds, and organic producers often label their products as being GM-free. "Such foods are clearly different," the letter states. "We are, in fact, concerned that that the current U.S. position appears to seek to establish a precedent at Codex that would make it difficult to label food as non-GM within the U.S."

Agribusiness would love nothing better.

This article available online at:

http://www.theatlantic.com/food/archive/2010/04/feds-on-gmo-labeling-dont-tell-dont-ask/39452/

Copyright © 2010 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All Rights Reserved.

NanoTech is not science fiction....

2010-04-17T18:48:00.000-07:00

foodfreedom.wordpress.com/2010/04/14/new-study-shows-possibilities-and-dangers-of-nanotechnology/#more-1725

I came across this article at the above blog, and wanted to say "Thanks!" to Rady for linking to my show and this blog…..This is a very interesting article on nanotech, and if you follow this link, there are many more things about nanotech available:

news.medill.northwestern.edu/chicago/news.aspx?id=162744>

I found it really intriguing that the researcher said "There's nothing special about blackholes" regarding the development through the merger of astrophysics and nanotech a nanotube of carbon. Truly, this is beyond my ken….But sometimes I think funny thoughts anyway!

I really don't want anything less than 100th the size of a virus in my food---OR my air. How about you?

Let's All Be the Same!

2010-04-15T04:17:00.000-07:00

If anyone doubted what I have been yammering about for years now on the international controlling our food supply and production, here is proof of that desire from someone with credentials....

Mike Robach, vice president of Corporate Food Safety and Regulatory Affairs for Cargill Inc., encouraged food processors to \push for an effective, modern, global food-safety system that would harmonize efforts from farm to fork and not simply make minor fixes to the current state of affairs.

Robach, speaking in today’s keynote session to attendees of the 2010 Food Safety Summit in Washington, D.C., explained that it is time to modernize food safety, both the systems and the standards, and called for involvement of all the stakeholders in the reform process — industry, consumers, government and academia.

“Without a clear vision forward, it’s impossible to build an effective, modern, global food-safety system,” he said.

Robach believes the federal government and Congress are committed to fixing the food-safety system, but he is concerned that all the current legislation does is patch an antiquated system that is further constrained by the structure of the USDA/FDA framework in place. He says that if we are to reform food safety, then we should analyze all aspects of food safety, to make sure that standards and regulations that have been in place for decades are still valid and meet the needs of the system.

Essential to the process is an improved partnership between the public and private sectors. Robach says that each of us plays a role in driving these partnerships forward.

“Neither sector can drive harmonization of the food-safety system alone,” he said. “Nor can the government, even though sometimes it appears to think it can.”

The Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI) has begun to build a bridge toward this path forward to harmonization, and Robach believes partnerships such as these will be necessary for reform to be far-reaching and successful.

Some of the key concepts Robach believes must be part of the reform include:

* the need for international recognition of the new standards, which must be based on science and risk
* results must allow flexibility for companies to achieve health objectives, rather than being prescriptive (Robach wants new standards to be objective-based, which would promote innovation by the industry, rather than a “how to” type of standard)
* use CODEX, OIE and IPPC as a basis for standardization
* international accreditation for audit schemes is necessary
* surveillance and rapid response must be improved via better relationships and collaboration by the industry with public-health agencies
* oversight must be focused on farm to fork, not simply the processing level
* reform must involve ALL stakeholders

Robach believes that without harmonization, any reform will not go the distance and stand the test of time.

“If people have different measurements of food safety, it’s too confusing for consumers,” he added. “But we cannot let food safety interfere with global trade.”

A global food-safety system would ensure a supply of safe food around the world at all times

JBS- Canning More Americans

2010-04-12T13:05:00.000-07:00

Some of you may be familiar with the Brazilian company JBS S.A. and the fact that it IS the biggest meat packer in the world and recently was allowed to purchase Pilgrim's Pride here in the US. They went into business with the Brazilian government (again) and sold their debentures on the stock exchange to pay for Pilgrim's Pride. A few months ago, when the purchase was completed, they laid off a bunch of workers from the company. Now they are closing the company headquarters in Pittsburg, Texas and dismissing more Americans. They will be centralizing their administrative efforts on this continent in their offices in Greeley, Colorado.

This may not seem substantial, but it truly is.

The fact of the matter is that JBS now is taking over Australia, the US, and I heard Russia in the meat sector. As a multi national corporation, they are interested in the bottom line, and that's really all. They don't have nationalities and loyalties as a corporation. The fact that Tyson recently stated their plans to open a facility in Argentina as opposed to the US because they can hire people for total overal costs of $3 per hour there as opposed to $15 per hour here should spark one's thinking. If we end up off-shoring all of agriculture, we will eventually be in the position of easily being starved out here.

Already 65% of produce is imported along with 80% of seafood. The official numbers indicate approximately 70% of our food is imported.

Remember kids, No Farmers, No Food.

We are losing our ability to produce anything except hot air here due to free trade, agency regulatory actions, lack of access to markets, too many constraints on direct trade, and failure to enforce the laws regarding anti-trust and monopolies on the part of the agencies charged with those enforcements.

This action by JBS (canning employees) was not unanticipated, but it is yet another blow to our ability to provide for ourselves. Wait until they move 70% of the production out of the country. Then we'll have some real fun.

====MeatingPlace.com has a members only policy for articles. This is where the article copied below came from. It is copied exactly as it was written en toto...

Industry News - PM
Pilgrim’s Pride to close HQ, Atlanta offices; plans layoffs

By Lisa M. Keefe on 4/12/2010

Pilgrim's Pride Corp. announced Monday that it will close its corporate headquarters building in East Texas and a satellite corporate office in Atlanta, resulting in total layoffs of 213 employees. Both offices are expected to close within about 60 days.

Many Pilgrim's Pride employees at the two corporate offices have been offered positions elsewhere in the company. Still, the company expects to eliminate 158 jobs at its headquarters in Pittsburg, Texas, and 55 jobs in Atlanta. Layoffs are expected to begin in mid-June.

The closings are billed as part of the company's ongoing integration with JBS USA, which assumed a majority stake in the poultry processor at the end of 2009. Those offices' functions are being moved to JBS USA's headquarters in Greeley, Colo.

The announcement comes three months after Pilgrim's Pride laid off 230 people from offices in Texas, Atlanta and Virginia. (See Pilgrim's Pride cuts 230 jobs as JBS takes over, on Meatingplace, Jan. 5, 2010.)

None of the jobs to be eliminated in June are production-related, and the processing facilities and operations will not be affected.

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

As per usual....WSJ on S510

2010-04-09T09:55:00.000-07:00

The Wall Street Journal contacted several people a few weeks ago regarding S510.....The Food Safety Modernization Act. It is poised to move either next week or the following week. Start making calls to your Senators and letting them know they should oppose this bill. here is a link to the WSJ article where Debbie Stockton of NICFA is quoted (www.nicfa.com)

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052702304172404575168232140548698.html

Please download the talking points from NICFA and then call your Senators to try to give them some light. There are many who want to amend the bill to 'exempt' small direct trade producers. One problem is that it still gives subject matter jurisdiction to the agency, and then with the Food Code done for every state health department, states are encouraged to implement ALL federal initiatives within their borders. Another problem is that the USDA and FDA are failing where they already have authority and funding, so giving them more authority to use fines and penalities on smaller entities will only further consolidate the food industry and therefore make it more unsafe for consumers. Here are the talking points from NICFA....

S 510, The Food Safety Modernization Act – Why It Will Make Food Less Safe

Considerations submitted by the National Independent Consumers and Farmers Association (NICFA)
www.NICFA.org Contact: Deborah Stockton 434.295.7176 nicfa@earthlink.net

S-510 will have the unintended destructive consequence of eliminating small farms and consumer access to local
food. The main threats to food safety – by the government’s own admission – are centralized production,
centralized processing and long distance transportation. The food safety bills will increase these risk factors by
further consolidating agriculture into fewer, larger industrial farms through enormous regulatory burdens that small
farms cannot endure. Small farms and farmers markets are an important economic engine, environmental safeguard
and national security asset. There is not a history of food borne illness from farmers’ markets or small farms.

1) S510 grants sweeping powers to the FDA (and the USDA). (see Reference (1) on attached page)
a) The FDA already has jurisdiction over live food animals, but S510 expands the FDA’s powers and authority. In
addition to the agency adding new regulations, agents could go on to farms, where less than one half of one percent
of foodborne illnesses originate, without having credible evidence that a problem exists, needing only “reason to
believe” in order to quarantine or shut down a farm. (Please see example on reverse side of paper)
b) TITLE II Sec. 208: striking ‘‘presents a threat of serious adverse health consequences or death to humans or
animals’’ and inserting ‘‘is adulterated or misbranded’’ means that if an agent “believed” that raw milk, for instance,
to be an adulterated food, he or she could shut down a farm that provides raw milk to consumers.

These agencies already have expansive authority to monitor and inspect areas where problems actually occur –
processing and handing – yet they are not fully inspecting. Why expand their powers to farms and cause financial harm
to those who produce the food? Increased inspections and regulations would only serve to impose additional costs and
burdens on family farming, destabilize local economies, promote "factory" food to the consumer and limit the consumers
right to purchase local products..

2) S510 is an enabling statute for international regulations. (see Reference (2) on attached page)
Reducing national authority and applying international standards to farms and small businesses will hurt the only
growing sector of agriculture this nation has, the direct trade and local food movements. All of the "Food Safety"
bills allow for this. International guidelines and standards are not designed to increase food safety, but to harmonize
and standardize all food production and processes.
a) The U.S. has already implemented several disastrous international standards, including “Hazard Analysis &
Critical Control Points” (HACCP) and "The Leafy Green Marketing Order."
i) HACCP has not increased food safety, but has resulted in the closure of slaughterhouses unable to afford it
that serviced small farmers in direct trade, increasing farmers’ costs for travel to distant abattoirs and
decreasing their ability to stay in business. S510 will allow HACCP – a 50-page book of rules – to be
required on farms.
ii) The International Plant Protection Convention’s (IPPC's) "Pest Free" standard, known as "The Leafy Green
Marketing Order" was written by industrial distributors and has resulted in no increase in food safety but has
caused gross financial burdens on small farms. E.g., in the Growers’ Compliance Costs for the Leafy Greens
Marketing Agreement (LGMA) and Other Food Safety Programs survey conducted in 2008 and 2009 by the
University of California, one of their many findings stated, “Growers reported their seasonal food safety
costs more than doubled after the implementation of the LGMA, increasing from a mean of $24.04 per acre
in 2006 to $54.63 per acre in 2007.”

3) Lobbyists for industrial agriculture do not represent small farmers and the consumers who buy from them. Congress
needs to consider the consequences to consumers and small farmers of giving agencies more power to enforce (fine and
imprison) those who are simply not as financially capable of exerting influence on the writing of the regulations that
Congress is considering authorizing by these statutes.

Conclusion:
• S-510 will not increase food safety.
• S-510 will put undue burden on the small farmer getting his products to the consumer.
• S-510 will reduce or eliminate consumer access to locally grown food.
We ask you to consider not acting on these bills until they can be properly worded.

(please see reverse side for further information)

FDA Abuse of Power, Real Life Consequences

One current example of the FDA’s abuse of power was in July 2008, when the FDA issued
a nationwide warning regarding a Salmonella risk on varieties of tomatoes. “The disease
wasn’t found on Georgia tomatoes, but the general public’s perception was that all tomatoes
were affected,” said Archie Flanders, an economist with the University of Georgia College
of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences. The scare cost Georgia farmers $13.9 million.
Georgia grows about 3,000 acres of tomatoes, worth between $60 million and $80 million
annually. According to an article from the University of Georgia, "During the tomato scare
of 2008, the U.S. tomato industry lost an estimated $300 million in revenue. Florida growers
bore the brunt of the recall, incurring up to $100 million in losses." It later was determined
that the outbreak of Salmonella did not come from tomatoes.

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

Call 877 210 5531 and get your Senator's office and leave them a message about why we don't need any more governmental controls in light of a complete failure to do what they are charged to do already......

I find it rather amusing that the WSJ knows when the Senate intends to take things up and holds articles until the timing is right. Kind of like the reason people with inordinate amounts of money keep vying for small potatoes Congressional positions.....the biggest insider trading racket around.

ARAPA---Global Food Safety Initiative and S510

2010-04-09T05:46:00.000-07:00

Arkansas Animal Producers Association

ANNUAL MEETING

Date: April 18, 2010

Time: 2:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.

Site: Atkins High School Auditorium

403 Ave. 3 Northwest

Atkins, Arkansas

Keynote Speaker: Mrs. Doreen Hannes

ARAPA member Doreen Hannes has thoroughly researched the origins &
impacts of "Free Trade" agreements and the National Animal
Identification System in particular & has been a major force in the
anti-NAIS movement both nationally & in Missouri. Her mission is to
expose the procedures & methods being employed to destroy the God given
rights of this once great republic. Doreen has her own talk radio
program & has written extensively on the NAIS. She will be doing a power
point presentation on the GLOBAL FOOD SAFETY INITIATIVE and why these
food safety bills in Congress right now will not only implement NAIS,
but more than that - this will be complete food control right down to
your garden & kitchen. Bring every person you can to HEAR THIS. This
isn't just about our animals anymore.

http://truth- farmer.blogspot. com/

Other Scheduled Speakers:

Mrs. Jeannie Burlsworth: Chairwoman of Secure Arkansas

Mr. Warren Phillips of Arkansas Animal Producers Association

Mr. Michael Steenbergen of the Arkansas Horse Council

Mr. Harvey Howington of the Arkansas Rice Growers Association

We will have an ARAPA business meeting to decide new board members. We
will also discuss what our next step is for the 2011 legislative
session.

Did you hear that "NAIS is dead"? NO, it is NOT! Come find out what
really happened!

Do you want to find out what happened with your Freedom to Farm Act last
spring in the Arkansas Senate Ag committee hearing? COME TO THIS
MEETING!

Are you wondering why a guy from the Ark. Rice Growers (3,000 members!)
is speaking at our meeting? COME FIND OUT—this is BIG news for ARAPA
and for Arkansas!

Do you have lots of questions & want answers? COME TO THIS MEETING!

THIS MEETING IS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC - ANYONE IS WELCOME TO ATTEND!

IF YOU KNOW SOMEONE IN ARKANSAS, WHETHER
THEY OWN ANIMALS OR NOT, PLEASE LET THEM KNOW ABOUT THIS MEETING.

Please bring friends and family!!!!

HSUS- Horribly Sadistic Urban Sociopaths

2010-04-07T12:32:00.000-07:00

http://www.cattlenetwork.com/Jolley--They-Shoot-Horse--Owners---Don-t-They/2010-04-05/Article.aspx?oid=1034823

A must read article about how loving and kind the HSUS (Horribly Sadistic Urban Sociopaths) is to horses once they have 'rescued' them from an owner that actually cares for them.

And another shorter overview exposing some of the methods of HSUS:

http://www.meatingplace.com/MembersOnly/blog/BlogDetail.aspx?topicID=6073&BlogID=8

Unfortunately, the HSUS (international) is part of the Global Animal Partnership working with the FAO and OIE to develop animal welfare standards, so to keep free trading, we will have to trade freedom yet again…..

Highly Disturbing Video

2010-04-05T04:34:00.000-07:00

The National Institute for Animal Agriculture (NIAA) held their "One World One Health" fanfare on March 15th through the 17th of this year. The keynote speaker was Dr. Corrie Brown, a PhD veterinarian professor and she gave a presentation that curled my hair. I have never seen anything quite like this. Inappropriate laughter when talking about the fact that we are being run via soft law and global govi-corp, and saying that it's all great and wonderful while the globe is turned into a full fledged global plantation via the corporate use of the WTO and the aforementioned soft law practices....Words are difficult to wrap around the impressions engendered by watching the tape. The dominant impression related back by those who have watched the clip is that these people are insane.

The video is 23 minutes long. You can watch it here: http://blip.tv/file/3378547

For those who don't know, "One World One Health" is the [lan by the Wildlife Conservation Society to fuse together all living creatures on the basis that we are all affected by the environment. It is the plan for NAIS for everything, and the framework for health and disease control in "human animal and ecosystem interface".

My biggest impression is that this is more "Global Basket Case" than Global Food Basket. See what you think.

The 21,000£ Goldfish...Ignorance Gone to Seed

2010-04-02T03:46:00.000-07:00

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1262250/Great-grandmother-tagged-selling-goldfish.html

Pet shop owner fined £1,000 and told to wear an electronic tag... for selling a GOLDFISH to a boy aged 14

By Jaya Narain
Last updated at 12:44 PM on 31st March 2010

Her offence was to unwittingly sell a goldfish to a 14-year-old boy taking part in a trading standards 'sting'.

At most, pet shop owner Joan Higgins, 66, expected a slap on the wrist for breaking new animal welfare laws which ban the sale of pets to under-16s.

Instead, the great-grandmother was taken to court, fined £1,000, placed under curfew - and ordered to wear an electronic tag for two months.
Seven-week curfew: Joan Higgins has to wear an electronic tag

Seven-week curfew: Joan Higgins has to wear an electronic tag

The punishment is normally handed out to violent thugs and repeat offenders.

The prosecution of Mrs Higgins and her son Mark is estimated to have cost taxpayers £20,000 and has left her with a criminal record.

Mark, 47, was also fined and ordered to carry out 120 hours of unpaid work in the community.

Last night, as an MP criticised the magistrates, Mrs Higgins - who has run the pet shop for 28 years - said the family's eight-month ordeal had left them traumatised.

She added: 'It's ridiculous. I mean, what danger am I that I have to wear an electronic tag? These last few months have been a very stressful time.'

The seven-week curfew imposed by the court means she is unable to babysit her great-grandson at his home or go to bingo sessions with her sister, and will be unable to attend a Rod Stewart concert after tickets were bought for her by her nephew, actor Will Mellor.
Joan and Mark Higgins

Joan Higgins, 66, and her son Mark, 47, have both been ordered to pay fines after selling a goldfish to a 14-year-old boy

Her son said: 'I think it's a farce. What gets me so cross is that they put my Mum on a tag - she's nearly 70, for goodness' sake.

'She's a great-grandma so she won't be able to babysit a newborn baby. You would think they have better things to do with their time and money.'

Mr Higgins claimed the undercover operation was a clear case of entrapment - when a person is encouraged by someone in some official capacity to commit a crime - and said the case should never have gone to court.

He said: 'The council sent the 14-year-old in to us. It is hard to tell how old a lad is these days. He looked much older than 14.'

He added that his mother almost fainted in the dock when magistrates told her she could go to prison for the offence.

'I told her they wouldn't send her to prison but she was still worried,' he said. 'The only other time she has been in court is when she did jury service.'
Majors Pet shop in Sale, Greater Manchester, where the incident occurred

Majors Pet shop in Sale, Greater Manchester, owned by Joan and Mark Higgins

Under the Animal Welfare Act 2006 it is illegal to sell pets - including goldfish - to children under the age of 16 unless they are accompanied by an adult. Pet shops must also provide advice on animal welfare to buyers.

The maximum penalty is imprisonment for up to 12 months, or a fine of up to £20,000, or both.

The Higgins family's ordeal began when council officials heard that Majors Pet Shop in Sale, Greater Manchester, was selling animals to children.

They sent the 14-year-old schoolboy into the shop to carry out a test purchase and Mr Higgins sold him the goldfish without questioning his age or providing any information about the care of the fish.

A council officer in the shop at the time also noticed a cockatiel in a cage that appeared to be in a poor state of health. A vet found the bird had a broken leg and eye problems. It was later put down.
Enlarge p4graphic

Mrs Higgins and her son were charged with selling the fish to a person aged under 16 and with causing unnecessary suffering to a cockatiel by failing to provide appropriate care and treatment.

Pleading guilty, Mrs Higgins told Trafford magistrates the cockatiel had not been for sale and she had been bathing its eye daily.

More...

* Need to move a dumped mattress? It's dangerous, we'll need a JCB, says 'jobsworth' council
* The end of the pedalling postie: Health and safety fears lead to phasing out of bikes

She had intended to take it to the vet but had been distracted and worried because her other son was in hospital.

The court heard that Mrs Higgins had possessed a licence to sell animals for many years and had never had any problems before.

She was fined £1,000 and given a community order with a curfew requiring her to stay home between 6pm and 7am for seven weeks.

Mrs Higgins did not have her licence to sell animals removed, but both she and her son were told that if they ever appeared in court for a similar offence they could face a jail sentence.

David Davies, Tory MP for Monmouth, said: 'You simply couldn't make it up. It is absolutely ludicrous that old ladies should be hounded through the courts and electronically tagged for something like this.
Pugh Hes In For Aiding and Abetting.jpg

'At a time when courts are being told not to lock up career burglars we have them issuing severe punishments like this on little old ladies.' Mr Davies, who has served as a special constable for three years, said: 'Not only is it traumatic for her but it is a complete waste of time and taxpayers' money. It is ridiculous.

'Instead of getting 14-year-old boys to act in this type of sting they should have them trying to nail people who sell drugs outside our schools.'

Trafford Council said it launched an investigation after an unsubstantiated complaint that the shop had sold a gerbil to a 14-year-old girl with learning disabilities. The council claimed the animal later died after the child placed it in a disposable coffee cup with a plastic lid on top.

But the complaint did not form part of the legal action in court and its truth cannot be verified.

Mrs Higgins said the shop had not stocked gerbils for months before the complaint anyway.

Defending the goldfish case, Iain Veitch, head of public protection at Trafford Council, said: 'The evidence presented for this conviction clearly demonstrates that it is irresponsible to sell animals to those who are not old enough to look after them.

'Let this conviction send out a message that we will not tolerate those who cause unnecessary suffering to animals. The council will always try to support pet and business owners so that they are able to care for their animals properly, but where they continually ignore the advice they are given, we will not hesitate to use our statutory powers.'

The goldfish was later adopted by an animal welfare officer and is in good health.

Nano Nano--- Na, No, Nada,

2010-03-25T21:28:00.000-07:00

You have GOT to go to this site and check into these articles further. This is what I spoke about on my radio show awhile back. These particles are evidently too small to be filtered out of the blood stream. It's horrifying.....I STILL like my Brave New World better as fiction!

----------

http://www.aolnews.com/nanotech/article/regulated-or-not-nano-foods-coming-to-a-store-near-you/19401246

Regulated or Not, Nano-Foods Coming to a Store Near You

Andrew Schneider Senior Public Health Correspondent
AOL News
Second in a Three-Part Series

(March 24) -- For centuries, it was the cook and the heat of the fire that cajoled taste, texture, flavor and aroma from the pot. Today, that culinary voodoo is being crafted by white-coated scientists toiling in pristine labs, rearranging atoms into chemical particles never before seen.

At last year's Institute of Food Technologists international conference, nanotechnology was the topic that generated the most buzz among the 14,000 food-scientists, chefs and manufacturers crammed into an Anaheim, Calif., hall. Though it's a word that has probably never been printed on any menu, and probably never will, there was so much interest in the potential uses of nanotechnology for food that a separate daylong session focused just on that subject was packed to overflowing.

In one corner of the convention center, a chemist, a flavorist and two food-marketing specialists clustered around a large chart of the Periodic Table of Elements (think back to high school science class). The food chemist, from China, ran her hands over the chart, pausing at different chemicals just long enough to say how a nano-ized version of each would improve existing flavors or create new ones.

One of the marketing guys questioned what would happen if the consumer found out.

The flavorist asked whether the Food and Drug Administration would even allow nanoingredients.

Posed a variation of the latter question, Dr. Jesse Goodman, the agency's chief scientist and deputy commissioner for science and public health, gave a revealing answer. He said he wasn't involved enough with how the FDA was handling nanomaterials in food to discuss that issue. And the agency wouldn't provide anyone else to talk about it.

This despite the fact that hundreds of peer-reviewed studies have shown that nanoparticles pose potential risks to human health -- and, more specifically, that when ingested can cause DNA damage that can prefigure cancer and heart and brain disease.

Despite Denials, Nano-Food Is Here

Officially, the FDA says there aren't any nano-containing food products currently sold in the U.S.

Not true, say some of the agency's own safety experts, pointing to scientific studies published in food science journals, reports from foreign safety agencies and discussions in gatherings like the Institute of Food Technologists conference.

In fact, the arrival of nanomaterial onto the food scene is already causing some big-chain safety managers to demand greater scrutiny of what they're being offered, especially with imported food and beverages. At a conference in Seattle last year hosted by leading food safety attorney Bill Marler, presenters raised the issue of how hard it is for large supermarket companies to know precisely what they are purchasing, especially with nanomaterials, because of the volume and variety they deal in.

According to a USDA scientist, some Latin American packers spray U.S.-bound produce with a wax-like nanocoating to extend shelf-life. "We found no indication that the nanocoating ... has ever been tested for health effects," the researcher says.

Craig Wilson, assistant vice president for safety for Costco, says his chain does not test for nanomaterial in the food products it is offered by manufacturers. But, he adds, Costco is looking "far more carefully at everything we buy. ... We have to rely on the accuracy of the labels and the integrity of our vendors. Our buyers know that if they find nanomaterial or anything else they might consider unsafe, the vendors either remove it, or we don't buy it."

Another government scientist says nanoparticles can be found today in produce sections in some large grocery chains and vegetable wholesalers. This scientist, a researcher with the USDA's Agricultural Research Service, was part of a group that examined Central and South American farms and packers that ship fruits and vegetables into the U.S. and Canada. According to the USDA researcher -- who asked that his name not be used because he's not authorized to speak for the agency -- apples, pears, peppers, cucumbers and other fruit and vegetables are being coated with a thin, wax-like nanocoating to extend shelf-life. The edible nanomaterial skin will also protect the color and flavor of the fruit longer.

"We found no indication that the nanocoating, which is manufactured in Asia, has ever been tested for health effects," said the researcher.

A science committee of the British House of Lords has found that nanomaterials are already appearing in numerous products, among them salad dressings and sauces. Jaydee Hanson, policy analyst for the Center for Food Safety, says that they're also being added to ice cream to make it "look richer and better textured."
Some foreign governments, apparently more worried about the influx of nano-related products to their grocery shelves, are gathering their own research. In January, a science committee of the British House of Lords issued a lengthy study on nanotechnology and food. Scores of scientific groups and consumer activists and even several international food manufactures told the committee investigators that engineered particles were already being sold in salad dressings; sauces; diet beverages; and boxed cake, muffin and pancakes mixes, to which they're added to ensure easy pouring.

Other researchers responding to the committee's request for information talked about hundreds more items that could be in stores by year's end.

For example, a team in Munich has used nano-nonstick coatings to end the worldwide frustration of having to endlessly shake an upturned mustard or ketchup bottle to get at the last bit clinging to the bottom. Another person told the investigators that Nestlé and Unilever have about completed developing a nano-emulsion-based ice cream that has a lower fat content but retains its texture and flavor.

The Ultimate Secret Ingredient

Nearly 20 of the world's largest food manufacturers -- among them Nestlé, as well as Hershey, Cargill, Campbell Soup, Sara Lee, and H.J. Heinz -- have their own in-house nano-labs, or have contracted with major universities to do nano-related food product development. But they are not eager to broadcast those efforts.

Kraft was the first major food company to hoist the banner of nanotechnology. Spokesman Richard Buino, however, now says that while "we have sponsored nanotech research at various universities and research institutions in the past," Kraft has no labs focusing on it today.

The stance is in stark contrast to the one Kraft struck in late 2000, when it loudly and repeatedly proclaimed that it had formed the Nanotek Consortium with engineers, molecular chemists and physicists from 15 universities in the U.S. and abroad. The mission of the team was to show how nanotechnology would completely revolutionize the food manufacturing industry, or so said its then-director, Kraft research chemist Manuel Marquez.

But by the end of 2004, the much-touted operation seemed to vanish. All mentions of Nanotek Consortium disappeared from Kraft's news releases and corporate reports.

"We have not nor are we currently using nanotechnology in our products or packaging," Buino added in another e-mail.

Industry Tactics Thwart Risk Awareness

The British government investigation into nanofood strongly criticized the U.K.'s food industry for "failing to be transparent about its research into the uses of nanotechnologies and nanomaterials." On this side of the Atlantic, corporate secrecy isn't a problem, as some FDA officials tell it.

Investigators on Capitol Hill say the FDA's congressional liaisons have repeatedly assured them -- from George W. Bush's administration through President Barack Obama's first year -- that the big U.S. food companies have been upfront and open about their plans and progress in using nanomaterial in food.

But FDA and USDA food safety specialists interviewed over the past three months stressed that based on past performance, industry cannot be relied on to voluntarily advance safety efforts.

These government scientists, who are actively attempting to evaluate the risk of introducing nanotechnology to food, say that only a handful of corporations are candid about what they're doing and collaborating with the FDA and USDA to help develop regulations that will both protect the public and permit their products to reach market. Most companies, the government scientists add, submit little or no information unless forced. Even then, much of the information crucial to evaluating hazards -- such as the chemicals used and results of company health studies -- is withheld, with corporate lawyers claiming it constitutes confidential business information.

Both regulators and some industry consultants say the evasiveness from food manufacturers could blow up in their faces. As precedent, they point to what happened in the mid-'90s with genetically modified food, the last major scientific innovation that was, in many cases, force-fed to consumers. "There was a lack of transparency on what companies were doing. So promoting genetically modified foods was perceived by some of the public as being just profit-driven," says Professor Rickey Yada of the Department of Food Science at the University of Guelph in Ontario, Canada.

"In retrospect, food manufacturers should have highlighted the benefits that the technology could bring as well as discussing the potential concerns."

Eating Nanomaterials Could Increase Underlying Risks

The House of Lords' study identified "severe shortfalls" in research into the dangers of nanotechnology in food. Its authors called for funding studies that address the behavior of nanomaterials within the digestive system. Similar recommendations are being made in the U.S., where the majority of research on nanomaterial focuses on it entering the body via inhalation and absorption.

The food industry is very competitive, with thin profit margins. And safety evaluations are very expensive, notes Bernadene Magnuson, senior scientific and regulatory consultant with risk-assessment firm Cantox Health Sciences International. "You need to be pretty sure you've got something that's likely to benefit you and your product in some way before you're going to start launching into safety evaluations," she explains. Magnuson believes that additional studies must be done on chronic exposure to and ingestion of nanomaterials.

One of the few ingestion studies recently completed was a two-year-long examination of nano-titanium dioxide at UCLA, which showed that the compound caused DNA and chromosome damage after lab animals drank large quantities of the particles in their water.

Sono-Tek, a company based in Milton, N.Y., employs nanotechnology in its industrial sprayers. "One new application for us is spraying nanomaterial suspensions onto biodegradable plastic food wrapping materials to preserve the freshness of food products," says its chairman and CEO.

It is widely known that nano-titanium dioxide is used as filler in hundreds of medicines and cosmetics and as a blocking agent in sunscreens. But Jaydee Hanson, policy analyst for the Center for Food Safety, worries that the danger is greater "when the nano-titanium dioxide is used in food."

Ice cream companies, Hanson says, are using nanomaterials to make their products "look richer and better textured." Bread makers are spraying nanomaterials on their loaves "to make them shinier and help them keep microbe-free longer."

While AOL News was unable to identify a company pursuing the latter practice, it did find Sono-Tek of Milton, N.Y., which uses nanotechnology in its industrial sprayers. "One new application for us is spraying nanomaterial suspensions onto biodegradable plastic food wrapping materials to preserve the freshness of food products," says Christopher Coccio, chairman and CEO. He said the development of this nano-wrap was partially funded by New York State's Energy Research and Development Authority.

"This is happening," Hanson says. He calls on the FDA to "immediately seek a ban on any products that contain these nanoparticles, especially those in products that are likely to be ingested by children."

"The UCLA study means we need to research the health effects of these products before people get sick, not after," Hanson says.

There is nothing to mandate that such safety research take place.

The FDA's Blind Spot

The FDA includes titanium dioxide among the food additives it classifies under the designation "generally recognized as safe," or GRAS. New additives with that label can bypass extensive and costly health testing that is otherwise required of items bound for grocery shelves.

A report issued last month by the Government Accountability Office denounced the enormous loophole that the FDA has permitted through the GRAS classification. And the GAO investigators also echoed the concerns of consumer and food safety activists who argue that giving nanomaterials the GRAS free pass is perilous.

Food safety agencies in Canada and the European Union require all ingredients that incorporate engineered nanomaterials to be submitted to regulators before they can be put on the market, the GAO noted. No so with the FDA.

"Because GRAS notification is voluntary and companies are not required to identify nanomaterials in their GRAS substances, FDA has no way of knowing the full extent to which engineered nanomaterials have entered the U.S. food supply," the GAO told Congress.

Amid that uncertainty, calls for safety analysis are growing.

"Testing must always be done," says food regulatory consultant George Burdock, a toxicologist and the head of the Burdock Group. "Because if it's nanosized, its chemical properties will most assuredly be different and so might the biological impact."

Will Consumers Swallow What Science Serves Up Next?

Interviews with more than a dozen food scientists revealed strikingly similar predictions on how the food industry will employ nanoscale technology. They say firms are creating nanostructures to enhance flavor, shelf life and appearance. They even foresee using encapsulated or engineered nanoscale particles to create foods from scratch.

Experts agreed that the first widespread use of nanotechnology to hit the U.S. food market would be nanoscale packing materials and nanosensors for food safety, bacteria detection and traceability.

While acknowledging that many more nano-related food products are on the way, Magnuson, the industry risk consultant, says the greatest degree of research right now is directed at food safety and quality. "Using nanotechnology to improve the sensitivity and speed of detection of food-borne pathogens in the food itself or in the supply chain or in the processing equipment could be lifesaving," she says.

For example, researchers at Clemson University, according to USDA, have used nanoparticles to identify campylobacter, a sometimes-lethal food-borne pathogen, in poultry intestinal tracts prior to processing.

At the University of Massachusetts Amherst, food scientist Julian McClements and his colleagues have developed time-release nanolaminated coatings to add bioactive components to food to enhance delivery of ingredients to help prevent diseases such as cancer, osteoporosis, heart disease and hypertension.

But if the medical benefits of such an application are something to cheer, the prospect of eating them in the first place isn't viewed as enthusiastically.

Advertising and marketing consultants for food and beverage makers are still apprehensive about a study done two years ago by the German Federal Institute of Risk Assessment, which commissioned pollsters to measure public acceptance of nanomaterials in food. The study showed that only 20 percent of respondents would buy nanotechnology-enhanced food products.

2010 AOL Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Stealth Care

2010-03-21T05:46:00.000-07:00

Today is the day that the House of Representatives are supposed to vote on the "Health Care" bill. Most agree that about 30% of the general population approves of the gov't run and socially paid for program. Of the remaining 70%, probably 30% are violently opposed to the scheme.

I wonder what the fall out from all of this will be.Some are predicting violence in the streets. The latest version shows in excess of $12 trillion for many things other than health. Our GDP is enough to cover it if that were all we were doing, but there is no way to continue to spend more than we earn and delude ourselves into thinking we can be 'free' under that type of policy. This is just one bill and it has over $12 trillion in it. These aren't funds from somewhere else, or things that have been paid for previously, these are new "bills"....with new charges.

The funny thing is that we don't even have the collateral to cover the debts we are already obligated to cover. So if they (the international bankers and other nations being the 'they' in this case) took everything we have in the country, it still wouldn't cover our debts and future obligations. Now we are going to add to it! And I sit and worry about paying the electric bill--Ha!

If it weren't for the fact that we trade real labor for fake money to pay fraudulent taxes on things we don't own, I might be able to get excited for our children's future. As it stands, I just want them to be able to eat. Ya know, they live longer if they eat than if they have insurance. Paper isn't very nourishing.

BTW, it's a dreary day here.

Loving Care from Gov't in Britain

2010-03-17T09:28:00.000-07:00

Farmers face payment cuts over cattle ID rules

Sarah Trickett

Farmers Weekly Interactive - UK Tuesday 09 March 2010 03:00

British cross compliance checks have revealed nearly half of all livestock farms face having single farm payments cut because of failures on cattle identification rules.

Cattle identification is perennially the most common transgression and the Rural Payments Agency is expected to take a tougher line this year, according to cross compliance adviser, Simon Draper.

In the past it has issued warning letters but this year many farmers could face cuts of government farm payments if they don't start complying with regulations.

And if failure rates continue as they did last year, with roughly 50% of holdings refusing inspections on cattle identification, inspection rates countrywide could be doubled, Mr Draper said.

Figures last year showed 8909 animals were incorrectly identified, 1281 farms had holding register discrepancies and 2459 holdings failed to notify births, deaths or movements. Refusal of state laws will not be allowed.

If breaches continue to increase they have the potential to hit a threshold, which under EU rules could result in the inspection enforcement process being doubled countrywide, said Mr Draper speaking at a farmer discussion meeting with officials from British Cattle Movement Service and the Cross Compliance Advice Programme.

"For every failure it is costing the industry, so it's in no-one's interest to be failing," he said. Funds are not being collected for the government. Farmers are refusing to pay.

This reinforces the importance of keeping accurate movement records and complying with legislation. Farmers also have to remember to keep up to date now - as it's too late to change things once the phone call has been received requesting an inspection.

"The inspection starts the minute you pick up the phone to the inspector," said Mr Draper.

Show Time!

2010-03-16T05:17:00.000-07:00

This week I go to a new time slot on libertynewsradio.com, with some new stations picking up the radio show. It's really exciting that people are interested in more in depth explanations of what is affecting each and every one of us as the move toward full harm-onization of our nation continues. By continuing to do the next right thing, we make it more difficult for those who think we are too stupid to even decide what we want too eat. Below is the show blurb for those who might want to listen.....

This week on Truth Farmer, Doreen Hannes will have David Gumpert, author of "Raw Milk Revolution" and several other books, as a guest to discuss issues and possibilities in the direct farm to consumer trade of agricultural goods, along with whatever else happens to strike their fancy. David is also a journalist (Business Week), as well as an icon in the local food movement. He has a great blog to visit, www.thecompletepatient.com.

Please tune in to the show at it's new time 10-11am Central on Saturday, March 20th to hear what promises to be a very entertaining and educational show brought to you through the grace of God..... and www.libertynewsradio.com. Call 866-986-6397 during the show with questions or comments.

Thank you!!

DC Farm Food Voices March 10th, 2010.....

2010-03-13T05:17:00.000-08:00

This week I went to Washington DC for the NICFA's fourth annual lobby day on behalf of Food Freedom for all. I was blessed to meet David Gumpert, Joan Veon, Joel Salatin and many, many others. Other than being in the pit of hell, it was fun. DC has a very negative effect on me. I simply can't feel right whenever I am there. I know, I know, whiney, whiney, but still.....the line from the song "I spent a week there one day" applies to the illustrious national capitol. Otherwise, the visit was great!

The point of this annual event is to bring awareness to the legislators that small and independent farmers, ranchers, and local food advocates are not represented by the normal astro turf ag organizations that lurk in those hallowed halls. As with most things, "we the people" are not being heard by the representatives that pass the laws that effect us. NICFA (National Independent Consumer and Farmers Association) has spearheaded this effort and done a fabulous job of engaging all sides of those interested in direct trade of real food. You can visit the website at www.nicfa.org. I am the Director of Research for the group, and must say that the leadership is deeply dedicated to the issue as opposed to their celebrity. Refreshing!

Prior to the event, I gave a first ever attempt at a teleconference seminar to try to explain in fair detail what the issues regarding the "food safety" legislation are and what the effects of ensconcing authority to enforce and enact international standards in a blanket fashion will be on those of us interested in farming and eating real, honest to goodness food. David Gumpert attended that seminar and he wrote a blog about it....http://www.thecompletepatient.com/journal/2010/3/10/the-elephant-in-the-food-rights-room-how-global-trade-agreem.html?lastPage=true#comment7752519 ---I am thrilled he thought enough of it to post it on his blog as he really gets this from the consumer standpoint and there are many more consumers than farmers or ranchers.

Honestly, every single one of us will be affected by the passage of any of these 'food safety' bills. Our food will be completely controlled, and this will serve only to further consolidate, concentrate and corporatize the food chain. Call your Senators and Reps and tell them not just no, but hell no, on HR2749 and S510. Talking points can be found at www.nicfa.org.

Until later......

More Regulations....Wheee!!!!

2010-03-13T05:04:00.000-08:00

While things have been very busy around here, they are absolutely frenetic at the federal level. As one who raises animals, I have a few thoughts on this idea of further control of antibiotics on farms. We, like most small farmers, use antibiotics to save lives, and not as a continual feed through program. I will use them as a last resort as it is better to save the animals life than let it die because I have an ideology that prevents me from using this medication. We first support the immune system, and then if necessary, will use the antibiotic. We simply cannot afford to have a vet come out whenever an animal is sick. If this restriction is ensconced as law in regulation, it will result in animal deaths and not in better health. Obviously there is concern about overuse particularly in CAFO's, and those should be regulated differently from regular farms, but definitions and power hungry bureaucrats should not get in the way of an individuals right to control their own livestock....Just as an aside, this is also an OIE intiative. Surprised??? Didn't think so!

http://blogs.desmoinesregister.com/dmr/index.php/2010/03/10/fda-mulling-restrictions-on-livestock-antibiotics/
FDA mulling restrictions on livestock antibiotics

Blog post by Philip Brasher • pbrasher@dmreg.com • March 10, 2010

The head of the Food and Drug Administration says the agency is continuing to look at possible restrictions on the use of antibiotics in livestock but pledged to consult with producers. Margaret Hamburg told a House subcommittee today that antibiotic resistance is one of the nation’s “foremost public health concerns” and there are clear linkages between the problem and the use of the drugs in farm animals.

“We are working closely with industry, listening to their concerns,” Hamburg said in response to a question from Rep. Tom Latham, R-Ia. “We are not going to move forward and institute a policy that we have not been able to base on sound science and evidence.”

She said the agency was looking at “regulatory pathways” to restrict animal antibiotic use but did not elaborate.

Last summer, an FDA official surprised the industry by calling for ending the use of antibiotics for growth promotion in livestock and requiring veterinary approval for all other uses of the drugs. Legislation pending in the House would ban the use of antibiotics for promoting growth in livestock.

“The use of antibiotics for growth promotion alone really needs to be scrutinized very, very closely,” Hamburg said.

When Latham pressed her for evidence of a linkage between antibiotics in livestock and drug resistance, Hamburg cited fluoroquinolones, a class of antibiotics that includes Cipro and that the FDA banned from livestock use in 2005. Poultry producers had been giving the drugs to entire flocks to treat disease outbreaks. Flouroquinolones “actually had to be withdrawn from (livestock) use because of the seriousness of the the resistance conerns,” Hamburg told Latham.

The livestock industry argues that overuse of antibiotics in human medicine is more to blame for resistance in bacteria than feeding the drugs to livestock.

Rep. Jo Ann Emerson, R-Mo., warned that requirements for closer veterinary scrutiny of antibiotic use could be a hardship for farmers, due to the lack of veterinarians in some areas.

Latham invited Hamburg to visit his district in north central Iowa, which includes the Agriculture Department’s National Animal Disease Center at Ames as well as a huge hog industry. “You’ll come to Iowa and find out that there are 3 million people but we have 17 to 18 million hogs,” he said. She did not immediately respond to the invite.

Bob's Red Mill Natural Foods: Owner gives company to employees

2010-02-24T02:45:00.000-08:00

--It just strikes me that here is a company that isn't looking for a bail out and is based on something actually GOOD for you! I like the fact that he has resisted buy outs and offers for public trading. I intend to buy some of this flour next time I get someplace that carries it....It made me happy to read this!

Dana Tims
Seattle Times
Sun, 21 Feb 2010

Milwaukie, Oregon, - Scores of employees gathered to help Bob Moore celebrate his 81st birthday this week at the company that bears his name, Bob's Red Mill Natural Foods.

Moore, whose mutual love of healthful eating and old-world technologies spawned an internationally distributed line of products, responded with a gift of his own - the whole company. The Employee Stock Ownership Plan that Moore unveiled means that his 209 employees now own the place and its 400 offerings of stone-ground flours, cereals and bread mixes.

"This is Bob taking care of us," said Lori Sobelson, who helps run the business' retail operation. "He expects a lot out of us, but really gives us the world in return."

Moore declined to say how much he thinks the company is worth. In 2004, however, one business publication estimated that year's revenue at more than $24 million. A company news release issued this week stated that Bob's Red Mill has chalked up an annual growth rate of between 20 percent and 30 percent every year since.

"In some ways I had a choice," Moore said of what he could have done with the company he founded with his wife, Charlee, in 1978. "But in my heart, I didn't. These people are far too good at their jobs for me to just sell it."

It's not that the offers aren't there. Hardly a day goes by that Nancy Garner, Moore's executive assistant, doesn't field a call or letter from someone wanting to buy the privately held company or take it public.

"I had four messages waiting when I returned from a recent vacation," she said. "Three of them were buyout offers." Garner said she and other employees are floored by Moore's plan, under which any worker with at least three years tenure is now fully vested.

"We're still learning all of the details," Garner said, "but it's very humbling to be part of a company that cares this much about its employees."

An employee stock-ownership plan, or ESOP, is a retirement plan in which the company contributes its stock to the plan to be held in trust for the benefit of its employees. The stock is never bought or held directly.

Vested employees are sent annual reports detailing their respective stakes in the company. When those employees quit or retire, they receive in cash whatever amount they - and the company, through increased revenues, new sales and controlled costs - are due.

"Eventual payouts could be substantial," said John Wagner, the company's chief financial officer and, along with Moore, one of four partners.

Moore said he began thinking about succession about nine years ago. He'd heard about employee-stock-option programs and got much more serious about the idea three years ago.

That Moore has now pulled off what few other company owners would even dream about comes as no surprise to longtime acquaintances, such as Glenn Dahl, owner of NatureBake bakery in Milwaukie.

"Bob's a force of nature," said Dahl, whose family's Gresham-area bakery was Moore's first wholesale customer in the 1970s. "He's always been that way. He gets an idea and just makes sure it happens, one way or the other."

Moore's own background is in electrical and mechanical engineering, but he fell in love with the mechanics of stone grinding in the 1960s after reading about old stone-grinding flour mills.

At about the same time, Charlee began sharing with him her delvings into the nutritional benefits of eating whole-grain foods. The couple put their passions to work by starting, with their three sons, their first milling operation in Redding, Calif.

In 1978, the couple moved to Portland to retire. Moore's idea at the time, reflecting his long-held sense of spirituality, was to learn the Bible in its original languages. A chance walk past a closed mill site near Oregon City changed everything.

"I call it my emotional epiphany," Moore said. "Whatever excuse I care to give, I was just sucked into it like a vortex."

A 1988 arson destroyed the mill, when Moore was 60. Undeterred, he rebuilt the operation, moved once because of space needs and now occupies a 15-acre production facility and a two-acre headquarters and retail outlet along Oregon 224 in Milwaukie.

Three production shifts, running six days a week, turn out a line of goods distributed throughout North America, Asia and the Middle East.

The company earned an extra splash of international recognition when a team traveled to Scotland and, apparently feeling its oats, won the world's porridge-making championship.

Employees are just now grasping the meaning of Moore's birthday gift.

"It just shows how much faith and trust Bob has in us," said Bo Thomas, the company's maintenance superintendent, who has put his four children through college during his two decades there. "For all of us, it's more than just a job. Obviously, it's the same way for Bob, too."

For Moore, meanwhile, nothing about the new arrangement will change a thing. He plans to do for the foreseeable future what he has done every day for decades.

"I may have given them the company," he said, chuckling, "but the boss part is still mine."

Source: The Oregonian

Truth Farmer with Joan Veon!!!

2010-02-19T05:53:00.000-08:00

This Saturday, on Truth Farmer, the radio show for real people, we'll be visiting with Joan Veon! She has attended a myriad of meetings on the establishment and origins of the Global Governance we are seeing come to fullness, and also authored several books on the topic. She is a tremendous educator and has done an amazing amount of work on exposing this machine. Her most recent offering is a dvd titled, "When Central Bankers Rule the World" and it is a tremendous body of work! Very, very helpful for people to understand the machinations and history behind the global financial crises and the aims of the powers that be are in this debacle. You can read Joan's articles and order her books at her website:

http://www.womensgroup.org/.

Please tune in to Truth Farmer this weekend, February 20th at 5pm Central Time and feel free to call in with comments after the first half hour by dialing: 866 986 6397!

Listen online: www.libertynewsradio.com
Via the telephone: 801 769 2170
Or check the affiliates list at Liberty News Radio to see if your local station has the program. If not, call them up and tell them they should!

Thank you and God bless!

Doreen

Mind Control-We are being manipulated...Surprise!

2010-02-14T06:04:00.000-08:00

I tried to deal with the technical snafus on my radio show as best I could, but I failed entirely to be able to wrap up the point I was trying to make about the subtle, consistent, mind control that we are all under almost continually simply by watching the major networks and listening to mainstream and even many 'alternative' news shows. The main objective appears to be to keep people in a state of panic so that they cannot truthfully process the information and decide if there is indeed any action that should be taken or what action should be taken. Even many patriot radio shows strive to keep people in this 'emotional state'. This creates a dependence upon the host for their emotional fix, and makes many people feel like they are 'special' because of the knowledge they now have, creating yet another set of intellectual elitists. This 'elitism' helps to stop actual effective, concerted and righteous address of the problems that exist in reality. In truth, when you are given the eyes to see, it comes with duty...Share it, and share it in love. If you cannot help keep your neighbor free, who isn't necessarily designed to deal with the mental acrobatics necessary to negotiate all the intricacies of sovereignty legal arguments, you cannot keep your own freedom. So while the problems may be complex, the solutions have to workable and use the KISS principle.

Anyway, I want to try to wrap up the attempted radio show now, if for no other reason than to give myself a little bit of a sense of completion.

The fact is that a group of people have been concertedly shaping the publics ability to both digest, and assess the information we are given about current affairs, and this IS mass mind control. The people fostering this control have perpetuated the mantra "perception is reality".

Here's how it works, they use the Hegellian Dialectic. This is "problem, reaction, solution". They create the problem, watch the reaction and then provide the solution. They use seminars and the Delphi technique to bring leaders into line with their solutions.

A lot of times, the problem is completely false. They will create a problem in OUR MINDS. (Think of all the hoopla surrounding global warming recently), and then they will watch the hue and cry from the public and provide the solution via 'policy' for us. Inevitably, those policies are such that they contract our ability to
1) profit from our labor
2) be accountable for ourselves
3) manage our own lives and children

The group pushing this thought control is called the Aspen Institute. Their origins are in "German Intellectualism" and they have been working concertedly behind the scenes with the leaders of business, the legislators, and the judiciary since 1947 to forward their plan of nothing less than 'global collectivism and humanism'. They have been very, very successful and are rather like the Holy Grail insofar as think tanks and the shaping of society via thought (perception)control since their inception. These folks have been instrumental in destroying critical thinking.

Just have a read through their handbook (available on line) titled "US in the World" and how they instruct their advocates to handle questions and opposition regarding initiatives that restrain our national sovereignty:

America must not compromise its sovereignty/flexibility.
Basic Advice: Talk about the benefits of cooperation, for us and everyone; in an interconnected world, it's the key to making progress on shared problems, it's the right thing to do and it works. Emphasize effectiveness, teamwork.
"...The real question is, how can we accomplish what needs to get done? Independent action is important for solving some problems. But most of today's big global challenges -- like global terrorism and the growing threat of global warming -- simply can't be managed by any one nation, no matter how strong. Many other challenges are best handled by a team of nations, each doing what it does best. The key to making progress on these shared problems is making a shared effort. That's just common sense. Working well with others is part of being effective in an increasingly interconnected world..."
"...America has maintained a position of global strength for the past 50 years not by staying out of international agreements but by helping to shape them. So we know from experience that in the long run, cooperation gives us greater influence and flexibility of action than going it alone. International agreements help us predict what others are going to do, which enables us to lay out our own policies more intelligently. And each time we demonstrate that we can be a good team player, it's that much easier to bring our partners along the next time. 'My way or the highway' feels good in the short run -- but ultimately it limits our options and may lock us into acting alone when we don't have to..."
"...In an increasingly interconnected world, we succeed or fail together. As a decent and responsible nation, America should be committed to working with others to make our world a better place. When nations work together as a team, everyone benefits..."
"...Sharing innovative solutions and inspiring international teamwork is the American way. When we live up to that tradition, we earn the respect and cooperation of other nations -- and together, we get results..."
"...Everyone benefits from international agreements and laws that make the world a more orderly place. If we want other countries to follow those rules, we have to follow them as well. It's a matter of common sense and common decency -- "doing unto others as you would have them do unto you." Americans understand this; that's why overwhelming majorities favor cooperative approaches over going it alone, even if we have to give up some freedom of action..."

Easter Bunny Reports "NAIS is Dead!!!!"

2010-02-09T05:19:00.000-08:00

©Doreen Hannes

February 8, 2010

As I reported after returning from the NIAA (National Institute for Animal Agriculture) meeting last August, rumors of the death of NAIS have been greatly exaggerated. (Read http://nonais.org/2009/09/05/ding-dong-nais-is-not-dead/) The USDA has finally admitted that they have too much negative publicity surrounding the name NAIS, and that they actually have to do what they tried to do in the first place: get the states to do their bidding on 'animal identification' and 'traceability' according to World Trade Organization standards. So yippee. They are only going to exercise their rule-making authority to control interstate commerce. Well, that's all they had the authority to do at the outset. So we should be giddy with excitement that they are openly proclaiming they will do just that now.

Should we be happier than a pig in a puddle because they openly stated that they will leave animals which never exit the state out of the new plan? They never had the authority to deal with those animals anyway…unless, of course, you take money from the USDA. Otherwise, that authority rests with your state. The USDA will continue to fund the states and work in a 'collaborative' way with states and industry (continuing the Public Private Partnership otherwise known as fascism) to develop the "minimum standards" that must be followed in order to participate in interstate commerce.

So, as many conversations with my compatriots in the fight against NAIS have alluded to, at last the USDA is pulling the commerce clause out and holding it up as their hammer for "minimum standards" that will be required by forthcoming regulations for 'disease traceability'. And why has the USDA taken to calling it 'disease traceability' instead of 'animal identification'? Because they only HAVE authority over the diseases! The FDA has authority over live animals on the farm (http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Testimony/ucm114752.htm), even though the majority of people don't know this, and it is a very useful poker chip in the globalization game. It is called misdirection, and those of us who have been deeply involved in the fight against the NAIS are very aware of this agency's use of misinformation, disinformation, subterfuge and general sneakiness in foisting upon us their WTO driven desire that will create captive supply for export of the entire domestic livestock population.

The only official document available on the "NAIS not NAIS" program is a seven page Q and A available at the new page for "NAIS not NAIS" called Animal Disease Traceability. (http://www.aphis. usda.gov/ publications/ animal_health/ content/printabl e_version/ faq_traceability .pdf). It's only 7 pages, so if you have read the previous 1200 pages of USDA documents on this program, it's a walk in the park.

One of the first questions that one asks when told "NAIS is Dead!", (aside from "what's it's new name?") is "What about all the people who are in the Premises Database with PIN's already?" According to the 7-page document, they stay in that database.

How about animals that are already identified with the "840" tags for NAIS? They also stay in the database. What about the "840" tags themselves? Well, the USDA and States will keep using them.

Are they going to halt further registrations into the NAIS database? Heck no! They'll keep registering properties and will also be using a 'unique location identifier' for this kinder, gentler NAIS that the States will run for us.

Why are they re-using the first two prongs of NAIS? Aside from the unstated fact that they are using them because they have to use them to be compliant with OIE (World Animal Health Organization) guidelines, they say it's because of the tremendous amount of money spent developing NAIS already even though it is un-Constitutional.

How much money? It's government math, so it's likely done by consensus as opposed to literal whole numbers that add up- you know, like 2+2=4. Consensus would make it possible for 2+2 to equal 5. Anyway, figures cited by various officials are anywhere from $120 million to $180 million. Less than 60¢ per person, so almost nothing when compared to the monstrous 107 trillion dollars in unfunded liabilities we are currently carrying. Believe me, when I say I am not for government waste at all, but when an agency has spent this much time and money on an unfruitful program, isn't it better to simply fully knock it in the head instead of changing the name and playing "Hide and Go Seek" with the people who have adamantly opposed this program? Why couldn't the USDA do the only truly Constitutional thing with this international-trade driven program and let those who want to deal in international markets do this to themselves through the Export Verification Services department of the USDA? Well, if they did that, not only would they have to actually be fully open and transparent, they would need to let the public in on the big secret that the United States is no longer in charge of its own policies, rather they are obligated to follow the Sanitary PhytoSanitary (SPS) directives of the World Trade Organization agencies, namely Codex Alimentarius, the OIE and the IPPC (International Plant Protection Convention).

And we still have the very real issue of the massive database for premises registration (or the unique location allocator) having no public or verifiable oversight to check whether or not people who have been told they were removed were in fact removed from that database. So if NAIS is dead, why not allow the database to be annihilated? Obviously, they are still following the plan.

What about the states that have passed legislation designed to constrain NAIS from becoming mandatory within their boundaries? How will this new disease traceability program affect them? Well, since this is NOT NAIS and the regulations aren't yet written, the states will have to wait to find out what requirements they MUST MEET in order to participate in interstate commerce. There's your hammer.

So how powerful is the interstate commerce clause? Pretty dang powerful. And if people who dealt in the local food movement fully understood Wickard vs. Filburn, (http://conservapedia.com/Wickard_v._Filburn) they would feel no consolation whatsoever from the USDA's statement that they are not interested in regulating livestock that stay within the state.

In a nutshell, this 1942 Supreme Court case found that since Filburn had accepted money as part of the Agricultural Adjustments Act and then grew wheat to feed his own livestock, that he was not only subject to the regulation of the USDA by accepting that money, but also, since he grew wheat, he hadn't purchased it, and had he not grown it, he would have had to purchase wheat which would have likely come through interstate commerce. Therefore, his planting of wheat affected interstate commerce and solidified the USDA's jurisdiction over his actions.

If you transplant "tomato" for wheat you can see how sinister this ruling truly is. If you grow tomatoes, you won't be buying them, so if you don't buy them, and since the store bought tomatoes likely cross state lines in their movement, you are affecting interstate commerce by growing tomatoes….This is precedent, and it is a very, very dangerous precedent. So taking money or help from the USDA to establish your local farmer's market is going to put you into a relationship that is highly precarious for freedom.

The interstate commerce clause was not designed to hammer states into submission to federal or international agency trade objectives, it was to stop states from unfairly discriminating against each other and to enable us to be a strong union of sovereign states that could actually feed itself and prosper. The only thing to do is to keep fighting with full knowledge and to get the States to exercise their duty to protect the Citizens from an overarching Federal government. We need states to completely free up direct trade between farmers and consumers and we need states to work together to create their own criteria for exchange of goods across state lines.

Do we have to 'stay engaged' in conversations with the USDA on this "New Not NAIS"? Yes, to keep telling them to go sell crazy somewhere else, we're all stocked up here, thank you. They should tend the borders, control and actually inspect the imports, run the disease programs that worked and were not massive consolidations of power in federal hands, and for cryin' out loud INSPECT the packing plants and stop trying to make consumers believe that farmers and ranchers are responsible for sloppy slaughtering!

Also, go ahead and leave a bunch of the milk chocolate rabbits for us. Chocolate is one thing we probably should import, but certainly not at the cost of our freedom and sovereignty.

Spring Food Shortage??

2010-01-17T05:42:00.000-08:00

Go to the original article and click through the links. If I were more than a heckuvagoogler in internet abilities, I would have these all clickable for you, but I am much more in tume with duct tape and hammers than computers, so please, if this sparks your interest, go to the original and read the background links.

Thanks!

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

Farmers across America and in many other parts of the world are calling 2009 the worst harvest they’ve ever seen – largely due to extended bouts of bad weather

January 7, 2010
By Michael Hampton

You have maybe two months to stock up on the necessities of life before food prices rise dramatically, potentially prompting a food panic, widespread famine, and quite possibly the long-expected collapse of the U.S. economy.
Farmers across America and in many other parts of the world are calling 2009 the worst harvest they’ve ever seen in their lives, owing largely to extended bouts of bad weather. At the same time the U.S. Department of Agriculture is officially forecasting bumper crops, while grain elevators stand nearly empty and close to three-fourths of the country’s farmland is in areas declared eligible for federal disaster assistance due to failed crops.
A popular farmers’ Web site is chock full of stories of entire crops of soybeans rejected for moisture damage, long delays in harvesting corn only to find out the corn is moldy, damaged or too light to be used as animal feed or even ethanol, and farmers unsure if they’ll even have a farm for another year due to the losses they’ve taken.
Most agricultural products are purchased in futures, which are promises to deliver a quantity of a commodity at a future date. Futures carry many risks, prominent among them the possibility that the commodity simply won’t be available at the promised delivery date. While futures prices are set by the market, some of the information used to set the prices comes from the USDA’s World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates reports. The unrealistic 2009 bumper crop predictions in its recent reports, which may have seemed reasonable months ago before 2009’s long string of bad weather but which USDA has failed to revise, drove futures prices artificially low.
But grain futures prices have already risen well above the USDA’s latest projections as the corn harvest threatens to drag on into March in some areas of the country, thanks to an unusually wet 2009 and unprecedented fall flooding in the Midwest.
The good news is that even with 2009 being the worst harvest in human memory, there will still be plenty of food in the U.S. to feed everyone in the U.S. The bad news — if you’re in the U.S. — is that the food won’t be used to feed everyone in the U.S.
It seems China has finally figured out what to do with all the U.S. dollars it’s holding. You’ll recall that the Federal Reserve took some pretty extreme measures over the last two years, ostensibly to save the U.S. economy. In fact, those measures have set us up the bomb. For decades China has been buying U.S. debt and financing Americans’ credit addiction as well as the government’s massive spending on millions of projects it has no business being involved in. But, it seems, they’ve had enough of the dollar and are about to pull the plug.
In the meantime, China has been using those dollars to buy every morsel of American food it can get its hands on. Combined with 2009’s bad weather and the USDA’s ridiculous numbers, this prompted a late August soybean shortage which is expected to continue through 2010.
The U.S. has a very good reason to fudge the numbers on crop estimates. If it published realistic numbers, and crop futures prices rose sharply, three things would likely happen: Wall Street would take massive losses, inflation fears would cause investors to dump bonds, frustrating the government’s attempts to finance its incredible expanding debt, and most importantly, China, whose currency is tied closely to the U.S. dollar, would allow it to appreciate. That alone would likely send the U.S. dollar into freefall; all three would mean utter economic collapse.
Of course, you can’t fool the market for long; as noted above, futures prices are already well above the USDA’s numbers. All they really managed to do with their numbers game was buy the U.S. dollar another year of life.
One market analyst believes that the 2010 food shortage will be the catalyst which not only brings about the collapse of the U.S. economy, but takes down Great Britain and Japan with it.

While a food crisis was unavoidable to some extent because of the abnormal weather and financial crisis, the total panic which will soon grip world agricultural markets is a creation of the USDA and its fictitious production estimates. If not for the USDA’s interference, food prices would have risen in the first half of 2009 in anticipation of the 2009/10 shortage. The United States Department of Agriculture has caused incalculable damage to the world economy by encouraging overconsumption of rapidly diminishing food supplies.
Once the 2010 Food Crisis starts, confidence in the US government will be shattered as a result of the USDA’s faulty estimates. The starvation and misery caused by higher food prices will also create a lot of anger . . . — Market Skeptics

In this scenario, rural banks will begin failing rapidly, especially in the Midwest, and the inevitable bailouts will drive up U.S. debt further. These bailouts, combined with the Chinese allowing the yuan to appreciate, will erode confidence in the U.S. dollar to the point that foreign banks and investors begin dumping U.S. debt at fire sale prices. At that point the Federal Reserve will have no choice but to print money, leading directly to hyperinflation.
I shouldn’t have to tell you what hyperinflation will look like, but in case you need a reminder, it will likely make the Great Depression look like a minor recession. Tens of millions of people who have never known want in their entire lives are going to be shocked to wake up broke and hungry, with no idea what happened or why it happened to them. The government will almost certainly be unable to fulfill its promises of food stamps, social security and other such welfare programs. Food riots are likely and people will almost certainly die when the government attempts to put them down.
Worst of all, almost nobody will assign blame where it truly belongs: central banks and fiat currency.
Market Skeptics and many other foreign investors I’ve seen quoted widely in foreign media but virtually never in the U.S., recommend investing in agriculture, except derivatives, and in precious metals. I also recommend you invest in as much nonperishable food as you can lay hands on in the next two months, at least a year’s supply if you can manage it. If there’s no collapse, you can eat it, and if there is, you’ll at least have something to eat. And when you read a headline such as “Yuan allowed to rise versus dollar,” it’s time to head for the hills.

http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2010/01/07/spring-food-crisis-may-trigger-economic-collapse/

Hearing on Use of NAIS Tags at Sale Barns

2010-01-16T11:17:00.000-08:00

© Doreen Hannes

On Thursday, January 13th, 2010 there was a Senate Government Accountability and Fiscal Oversight Committee hearing at the Capitol on the usage of National Animal Identification System "840" tags by the veterinarians at sale barns across Missouri.

The hearing was to allay the confusion amongst sale barns and determine whether or not the Department of Agriculture was following the voluntary parameters set for NAIS in Missouri by the usage of these "840" tags.

The NAIS (National Animal Identification System) is a 3 part program. The first prong is Premises registration with a seven character number permanently assigned to a particular location housing or holding animals. The second prong is the use of these "840" tags which necessitate a premise id number to be used. The third component is the reporting of movements from the ascribed premises and various other things such as vaccinations and tag replacements and "sightings".

Near the beginning of December it came to light that many sale barn markets in the state of Missouri were using the 840 tags on cows going through chutes who had no official identification. It was reported that as of January 1st, 2010, all cows, with or without official identification, would receive the 840 tags when they went through chutes for health tests or pregnancy checks Different markets reported different criteria for this NAIS "840" identification of cows. Some producers reported they were told they "had to" use the 840 tags in order to sell cattle at some sale barns.

In 2008, the Missouri General Assembly passed SB931, prohibiting the Department of Agriculture from mandating or otherwise forcing participation in NAIS, and allowing for the immediate removal from the program of anyone who was assigned a premises id unless they were part of a disease control program or an ongoing disease investigation.

This hearing was to clear up confusion on the law as it applies to both the state of Missouri and the veterinarians licensed by the state. Chairman, Senator Chuck Purgason, stated, "We want to clear up confusion, and to make sure veterinarians are not violating people's rights regarding this program."

Missouri State Veterinarian, Dr. Taylor Woods and Secretary of Agriculture, Dr. Jon Hagler, did not appear at the beginning of the hearing. A representative from the Department of Ag and a veterinarian with the State Vet's office, Dr. Linda Hickle, appeared, but knew little of policy and stated that the Secretary and State Vet were not aware that they were to be present at this hearing.

Three other individuals testified at the hearing and during the last testimony, the State veterinarian and Secretary of Agriculture came into the hearing room.

They testified that they had no official written policy on the usage of the "840" tags and had communicated with the market veterinarians by face to face contact regarding the allocation of the 100,000 "840" tags the Department has received from the USDA. They stated they had no particular agreement as to the distribution and application of the NAIS tags, but that the application of the tags was to be at the discretion of the market veterinarian.

The Department was instructed by the Committee to write and distribute to all market veterinarians instructions on the usage of these "840" tags and to inform the market veterinarians that the application of "840" tags was to be done solely at the request of the producer in compliance with the law of the State of Missouri.

No instructions or inquiries were made into how any redress is to be achieved by those who may already have been put into the NAIS program without their knowledge or consent by buying or selling cattle through a market that was applying the tags to all cows from January 1st through the time of the distribution of the letter requiring compliance with the state law.

Ahhh, the Census....

2010-01-16T09:38:00.000-08:00

A Warning to Pastors - The 2010 Census

The Constitution of the United States requires an enumeration of the people be made every ten years for the purpose of determining the number of Representatives to serve in the House of Representatives. This year, 2010, is a year in which this enumeration is to be done.

However, the Federal government has, over the years, expanded the scope of the census to a point that I believe is not only beyond the bounds of it’s Constitutional authority, but dangerous as well. One facet of the 2010 census that is very dangerous is the effort by the Federal Government to enlist the help of churches to conduct the census.

Last week the church that I pastor received a package of materials from the local office of the Census Bureau. In this package was a letter inviting us “to participate in our faith based initiative to promote the Census…”. The letter states, “2010 Census: Your help is not just wanted, it’s needed”. Some of the help that the Census Bureau is asking from the church is to advertise that they are hiring in our area. The letter also states that, “We are looking for sites in the community that can be used as Questionnaire Assistance Centers for a 4-6 week period during the Census mail-out operation. We are also looking for additional sites with tables and chairs to conduct testing and training sessions such as a church fellowship hall or community room.”

Pastors, beware! Having served on the local school board about 20 years ago, I have first hand experience with how the Federal Government creeps in and eventually takes over. Consider what has happened to local government and our school systems since they have received money from the Federal Government. Though they contributed only about 6% of our budget when I was on the school board, the Federal Government had the final say in what could or could not be done. It is control that they will never relinquish. Make no mistake about it, the same thing will happen if a church allows the Census Bureau to set up shop in our Lord’s Church.

The scripture is clear concerning the fact that Jesus Christ is the head of His Church. Speaking of Jesus, the Bible says in Colossians chapter 1, verse 18,

“And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.”

Once the Federal Government is allowed into the church, they will demand that they have the preeminence. You may ask, “How so?” Well, Jesus Christ, who is the head of the body, has given us a command in the Gospel of Mark, chapter 16 verse 15,

“And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the Gospel to every creature.”

Already the Federal Government has restricted when and where the Gospel may be preached. No longer do school children begin their day with scripture reading and prayer in government schools. No longer may Christian chaplains in the Navy pray in Jesus’ name at ceremonies and other official functions. We lost these and other battles because we compromised. Now they are moving the field of battle from the public square into the church itself. If we give place, they will have the final say concerning what the church may or may not do. Will the pastor and members of a church which allows the Census Bureau to set up shop be allowed to preach the Gospel to the Census workers or to those who come to apply for employment? Or will they be required to withhold the Word from them, in disobedience to Christ’s command? What a sin it would be to allow ourselves to be silenced within the very walls of the church building! Once they are allowed in, and especially if a church receives money from the government, the will never willingly relinquish control.

My brothers, “Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? and what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? and what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, and will be a father unto you, and you shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.”

Pastor Glenn Guest

For further reference:

Toolkit for Reaching the Faith-Based Community

http://2010.census.gov/partners/toolkits/toolkits-faithbased.php

Obama Faith Council Debates Requiring Fed. Fund Recipients to Remove Religious Symbols - LifeSiteNews.com

http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/jan/10011506.html

2009: A Near Catastrophic Year For Dairy Farmers

2010-01-09T16:52:00.000-08:00

People, we have GOT to realize that our ability to provide food for ourselves is actually a national security issue. Please read this article below which only touches on the issue of the WTO in destroying our ability feed our own population....Let me know what you think. Sometimes it feels like I am speaking into a black hole and things are not resonating with my fellow countrymen.

River Reporter

Farms are closing at an alarming rate

By TOM KANE

REGION & NATION — Things couldn’t be much worse than the way the dairy farmers are rewarded or, more accurately, not rewarded, for the quality and quantity of the milk that America ’s dairy farms produce.

And it’s not because they haven’t been articulate about what is needed: a real connection between the dairy farmers’ cost of production and the price they get for their milk.

The federal government and the dairy cooperatives, called coops, have failed dairy farmers who have been falling by the wayside this year and for the last 10 years. Dairy farms have been disappearing at an alarming rate and nothing is being done to staunch the extinction.

Two senators from Pennsylvania , Arlen Specter and Bob Casey, are working hard to solve this. They have created legislation, called the Federal Milk Marketing Improvement Act of 2009 – S-1645, and farm organizations across the Northeast and farmers in other milk-producing states are getting local, state and federal elected officials to urge its passage.

“Support for these resolutions by local government officials highlights their understanding of the severe damage being inflicted on their communities by the on-going dairy farm economic crisis,” said Arden Tewksbury of the Progressive Agriculture Organization (Pro Ag).

Pro Ag, the National Family Farm Coalition, the National Farmers Union, National Farmers Organization, the American Raw Milk Producers Pricing Association, Family Farm Defenders and many other farming organizations are supporting what is being called the Specter-Casey Bill.

One of the problems that passing such a bill will face is what is called the “global trade mentality” that is prevalent among legislators and business people. Under global trade agreements, it is easier to bring in products that can hurt American industries, in this instance, milk producers and distributors. “Without fair raw milk prices that can’t be undercut by the global trade movement, local dairy farmers will not survive,” Tewksbury said. “The once vibrant rural communities will continue to collapse and consumers will not have access to fresh, local milk and dairy products.”

Recently, New York State Senator John Bonacic urged dairy farmers to storm Albany in order to resolve the plight of New York dairy farmers. “Governor Patterson ignored my plea to use the Obama stimulus money to help solve the inequities that exist in New York State ,” he said. “If the legislators won’t come to you, then bring the message to them. Go to Albany in numbers and make them listen.”

Subsequent to Bonacic’s suggestion, dairy farmers traveled to Albany but had little effect on any action by the state.

Recently, the Congress passed a stop-gap measure with legislation that will pump $300 million into the dairy industry to relieve farmers. This one-time payment, as welcome as it is, will not change the convoluted process used by the feds and the dairy coops to set the price of milk, some of which date back to the Great Depression and even further.

Dairy farmers generally are disappointed with the coops that are not helping farmers get the best milk price. Many say that the coops, even though dairy farmers are on their boards, are in the business to maximize their profits, largely ignoring the plight of the dairy producers.

Local dairy farmer Brian Smith, who is also the chairman of the Wayne County Commissioners, won a seat on the board of the local Dairy Farmers of America (DFA) board—the regional coop—when he campaigned on the poor job the coops are doing for the dairy farmers.

One of Smith’s main concerns is that dairy farmers cannot compete on the world market because of the cheap milk products that are available in foreign markets. He says the coops promote the importing of milk products, despite what it is doing to the poor price dairy farmers are getting today.

“I dispute the word promote,” said Monica Massey, DFA vice president of corporate communications. “We have to operate in a global dairy environment. That’s the reality. There are no fences around our country. If we want to export milk products, and we do, then we need to be prepared to accept imports. It is our aim to minimize imports. We export 10 to one. We exported 1.2 million pounds of milk last year and imported one million pounds. We can not limit imports unreasonably. The World Trade Organization (WTO) says we have to do this.”

Dairy farmers say that the coops are not the only organizations that are dragging their feet on the issue of a fair price to farmers for their milk. Other companies in the dairy business as well are not doing all they can and are only interested in maximizing their profits, dairymen say. They mention companies like Dean Foods, the largest distributor of milk and other foods in the nation, and Land O’Lakes, another large distributor of milk products.

According to figures released by the Federal Election Commission, these companies were among the top contributors to federal candidates’ election campaigns in both parties. Dean Foods donated $378,000 to both party candidates, DFA donated $164,900 and Land O’Lakes donated $113,050. The contributions did not come directly from the companies but from their political action committees. Dairy farmers are claiming that these companies have the ear of Congress members who are loath to pass legislation that will hurt the companies’ bottom lines.

Double Think on Disease-

2009-12-14T04:48:00.000-08:00

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.

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

2009-12-08T20:17:00.001-08:00

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 libertynewsradio.com. 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: kevin.fridley@state.sd.us

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: Darwin.Kurtenbach@state.sd.us

William Even. Secretary of Agriculture for the State of South Dakota
Email address: AGMAIL@state.sd.us

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
605-673-3554
streffers8@gwtc.net

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,
richard_boyden2000@yahoo.com
http://www.operationmorningstar.org

Good as Gold-- or not

2009-12-08T03:38:00.003-08:00

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?
http://www.viewzone.com/fakegold.html

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.

Background

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. Morgenthauâ€™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 LBMAâ€™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 http://www.gata.org/files/GATAFedResponse-09-17-2009.pdf.

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

--- NAIS is Contagious----

2009-12-07T11:57:00.000-08:00

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

12/7/09
©Doreen Hannes

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Food Fight Continues!....and more

2009-12-05T13:27:00.000-08:00

In just a little while I will be doing a show with Darol Dickinson of Ohio the proprietor of www.head2tail.com and www.texaslonghorn.com as well as the one he has become notorious for, naisstinks.com. You can listen to the show at www.libertynewsradio.com 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:

http://juicymaters.com/blog1/?page_id=302

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, www.libertynewsradio.com 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 www.libertynewsradio.com/donate.php 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!

Ukrainian Super Flu News

2009-11-17T05:15:00.000-08:00

I hope all the clickable links come through on this, but if not, please go naturalnews.com 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!!!

NaturalNews.com

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 (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/wor...).

The mainstream media is blaming Ukraine's poor health care system for the relatively high rates of hospitalization and death (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/14/w...), 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:
http://ukraineplague.blogspot.com/
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). (http://www.who.int/csr/don/2009_11_...).

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. (http://www.naturalnews.com/025760.html) 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 (http://www.google.com/hostednews/af...).

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:
http://www.who.int/csr/don/2009_11_...
http://www.recombinomics.com/News/1...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/wor...
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/14/w...

Let the enforcements begin!!!

2009-10-31T14:01:00.000-07:00

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!

http://www.agriview.com/articles/2009/10/29/livestock_news/livestock01.txt

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.”

Truth Farmer Radio Show 10/24

2009-10-24T09:12:00.000-07:00

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:

http://stepstowardthemark.com/

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:

http://libertynewsradio.com/

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

801-769-2970

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

866-986-6397

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 -animalwaitress@yahoo.com…..Thanks!!!

NAIS Enforcement Begins....

2009-10-24T08:44:00.000-07:00

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 rytoday.com/ story-news. asp?id=BLH90P4H0 0I

Welcome to the Global Plantation

2009-08-13T05:01:00.000-07:00

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

© Doreen Hannes 2009

HR 2749 AUTHORIZES NAIS and OTHER INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS
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)

and…

"……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”
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 GlobalGAP.org. This is "the" certifying methodology for international trade in ag products. Here are a few excerpts from their 122-page general regulations booklet 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….

“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?

PENALTIES AND FINES
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)

NO JUDICIAL REVIEW
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.

HR 2749 and some of the problems with it

2009-07-21T13:04:00.000-07:00

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!

http://www.ers.usda.gov/Briefing/FarmStructure/Questions/familyfarms.htm

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

http://www.fda.gov/Food/FoodDefense/Bioterrorism/FoodFacilityRegistration/ucm063700

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

http://cfr.vlex.com/vid/1-227-what-definitions-apply-this-subpart-19703879

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.

http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/AC/07/briefing/2007-4329b_02_01_FDA%20Report%20on%20Science%20and%20Technology.pdf

Report on the dysfunction of FDA……subcommittee

http://www.clonesafety.org/

A PR website that promotes cloning rather than biodiversity.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/15/AR2008011501555.html?hpid=topnews

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

www.bio.org

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

http://vlex.com/vid/sec-vitamins-and-minerals-19200876

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

Where is their Bail Out?

2009-05-21T07:42:00.000-07:00

HOW CAN THIS HAPPEN IN A FREE MARKET ECONOMY IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA?

http://www.garynorth.com/public/4979.cfm

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.

HOW IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CAN THIS HAPPEN?

THIS IS A PRIVATE BUSINESS NOT A GOVERNMENT ENTITY

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.

HOW CAN THIS HAPPEN IN A FREE MARKET ECONOMY IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA?

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

Sincerely,

George C. Joseph
President & Owner
Sunshine Dodge-Isuzu

http://www.sunshinedodgeisuzu.com/staff.html