The End Approaches


As a member of Warn the People, I have been apprised of some new information about the impending police state control grid. What is significant about this information is that, first of all, it comes from FEMA and, secondly, it is of a very timely nature.

The gist of it, which you can hear in its entirety in the two videos here, made by WTP members on the West coast, is that our corporate overlords are planning to “shut down all the banks” by August or September of this year – a scant five or six months from now – and there will be “roadblocks and checkpoints” installed on every major highway, freeway and interstate. The “rural areas” are to be left alone while the cities will become increasingly militarized.

My own analysis, based upon two years of research, shows this is consistent with what I’ve learned about the New World Order plan to take down the United States.

For example, there is the film Endgame: Blueprint for Global Enslavement, by Alex Jones, which, in the first few minutes of the film, mentions that we will be “herded into compact cities” and that the outlying rural areas will be left to decay, as part of the plan to “re-wild” the bulk of the North American continent, allowing it to return to nature. This “rewilding” has been hinted at in a recent History Channel documentary titled, Life After People, in which several commentators from various disciplines speculate on how the world would be after the “hypothetical” removal of all human life.

Protectionism is not a dirty word

Leave a comment

Back in the Old West, when the wagon trains were attacked someone had the good sense to yell, “Circle the wagons!” which is probably the best example I can give for advocating protectionism.  It isn’t a dirty word.  It isn’t the attack of the commies, the pinko’s, the socialists, the Marxists, the any ‘ists” that litter the language of those who seek to secure for them selves some safe haven in the current global roiling or those who anticipate profiting while destroying the lives of so many others.  Welcome to globalism.


Whether Republican or Democrat, conservative or liberal, right or left or fence riding in the middle, we have a total lack of representation in either house of congress and a new president who has made it plain that he intends to continue us on the same path of destruction as the previous president.


We are a country whose own government has declared war on us.  We need to circle the wagons.  We are under attack, not from some vague and undefined terrorist group, but from those who swore to represent us; those we elected to speak for us in government. 


Our [federal] government was incorporated in 1871.  That’s a fact.  As a result, codes and statutes were enacted; that’s a fact too.  Then we got [administrative] courts to administer codes and statutes to enable the government to avoid constitutional protections and inalienable rights for the free and sovereign citizens of the states. 


In 1913 under the Federal Reserve Act, our national treasury was abolished along with the Treasury Secretary’s cabinet position.  All our revenues from any source have been deposited in the World Bank and administered by the International Monetary Fund since that time.  The Treasury Secretary then became a [governor] who works as liaison between this private banking cartel known as IMF and the US government [operating as a corporation.] 


Soon after this came the creation of agencies and these agencies were in 1946 under the Administrative Procedures Act, given “rule-making” authority.  This just means that congress ceded its constitutional authority to make laws to unelected bureaucracies who proceeded to conduct themselves as isolated and unaccountable mini-dictatorships.


Conducting the country’s in-house business in this manner allowed the government to implement laws (rules) which many times would have resulted in political suicide had they been introduced as legislation and by-pass those pesky constitutional provisions again. 


During the Nixon administration we got a highly touted program called “fast track”.  Supposedly, there were trade deals and other highly suspicious instruments that were so pressing the president needed uncontrolled and unaccountable authority to enter into them simply on his own; no congressional oversight, no adherence to the constitution.  The corporate US government was suddenly kicked into high gear but of course no one mentioned this little known change in the character of the federal government.


The United States of America a.k.a. Then United States, is listed on Dunn & Bradstreet along with every alphabet agency ever created and the Supreme Court of the United States.  Of course, “we the people” are not. 


Fast track went on unabated through Ford, Reagan, Bush 1, Clinton, and Bush 2.  It finally was ended in 2006.  But the damage was done and congress didn’t end this program until it was abundantly clear that our sovereignty had been so compromised by illegal trade agreements, unregulated financial systems, and corporate raiding and pandering, there was nothing left to sell off, trade off or give away. 


Our manufacturing base has been dismantled and millions of jobs lost.  We have nothing to sell, nothing to trade.  Supposedly we are now a “service based economy” which simply means about the only jobs we can get are those paying minimum wage with no future.  It seems it never occurs to those who promote this insult to American workers that if we have no jobs, we have no money.  If we have no money……what services will we be buying?  Can you say “depression”? 


We are being driven to the edge of a cliff.  It has taken many generations and lots of future planning and I suppose in the thinking of some, it has taken far too long. 


We need to adopt a protectionist attitude if we are to survive in any form even remotely resembling the country we once thought we had.  The illegal trade agreements need to be scrapped.  Corporate influence and access to our government needs to end and every person currently holding a seat in either house of congress needs to be booted out.  We need to start over with a clear message that America is first and foremost.


Protectionism is not a dirty word.  It is the only way we can survive.  We have had our economy imploded intentionally, our rights stripped under false pretenses, our borders left unsecured by those who see the influx of slave labor as something to be desired, and a congress now intent on subjecting us totally to unconstitutional and non-US regulations and laws.


We are under attack.  If someone doesn’t call for the wagons to be circled soon, we may as well just cut the mules loose and throw our hands up in surrender.


© 2009 Marti Oakley


Voting on the budget and what it will cost you

Leave a comment

D o w n s i z e r – D i s p a t c h

Quote of the Day: “The only things that are immortal in this world are government programs and cancer cells in petri dishes.” — Jim Babka, President, DownsizeDC.org, Inc.

Subject: Day of Ruin

Future historians may someday come to identify one day this week as a day of ruin. Here’s why . . .

Congress will pass a budget this week. We believe this budget will create a condition of permanent annual TRILLION dollar deficits. Please follow our logic . . .

* Government programs never die. They live forever, growing constantly larger.
* The Obama-Democrat budget contains a host of new programs covering all aspects of YOUR life — health care, energy, education, housing, charity, EVERYTHING.
* These programs won’t die, instead they’ll just grow larger.
* We think the same thing will hold true even for many of the bailout programs that are supposedly temporary, because very few government programs are ever really temporary.
* Therefore, the trillion dollar deficits these new initiatives are causing today will also live and grow forever.

In the short-term this will cost your family a minimum of $27,800 per year, or $9,200 per person.

In the not-so-short term these trillion dollar annual deficits will crash head-on into the un-funded liabilities for Social Security and Medicare which have risen to $56.4 trillion dollars, your share of which is a whopping $184,000!

And none of these statistics include the associated increases in top-down, one-size-fits-all government regulation. For instance, plans are already well advanced to turn the American health care system into a giant HMO, with federal bureaucrats deciding what medical treatments you can and cannot receive.

We must repeat, once these new programs are launched they’re unlikely to ever shrink again, let alone die. Government programs really are like cancer cells in a petri dish, which live unless the scientist in charge of them forgets to feed them. Something similar may happen in the case of our cancerous government . . .

The people who fund the federal government’s debt, including governments like China, may decide to stop. This might kill the cancerous government programs, but at a crushing cost.  

Do these numbers and their consequences shock you? They should, but the number we really need to start focusing on is the Misery Index for Politicians, which is the total number of Internet messages and phone calls the politicians receive protesting their actions. We need to make the Misery Index for Politicians soar.

Please use our quick and easy Educate the Powerful System to tell your elected representatives to vote NO on the Obama-Democratic leadership budget. You can use our “cut spending” campaign for this purpose.

Or, if you sent a message yesterday using the “cut spending” campaign, then please send another one today using our “unfunded liabilities” campaign.

Then, when you see the phone numbers for your elected representatives on your computer screen, call each one of them and deliver the same message by phone. Make the politicians feel miserable about what they doing to our country.

And after you’ve made your calls . . .

* Go here
* And after you’re logged in at Digg and you’ve “dugg” the message, click “thumbs up” in response to the first appropriate comments on this Digg post

We’ll report back tomorrow on the number of Internet messages sent and phone calls made. And we’ll know how many calls were made based on how many “thumbs up” we see!

Now, if we haven’t said enough to make you take action, please consider the reckless pace at which Congress is moving. They’re not only rushing to pass a dangerous budget before the two-week Easter recess, they’re also going to vote on a huge number of bills this week, without READING A SINGLE ONE OF THEM. Here’s the list . . .

H.R. 1388 – Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act
H.R. 1171 – Homeless Veterans Reintegration Program Reauthorization Act of 2009
H.R. 1377 – To amend title 38, United States Code, to expand veteran eligibility for reimbursement by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs for emergency treatment furnished in a non-Department facility
H.R. 1513 – Veterans’ Compensation Cost-of-Living Adjustment Act of 2009
H.Res. 152 – Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the United States remains committed to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)
H.R. 1246 – Early Hearing Detection and Intervention Act of 2009
H.R. 756 – National Pain Care Policy Act of 2009
H.R. 20 – Melanie Blocker Stokes Mom’s Opportunity to Access Health, Education, Research, and Support for Postpartum Depression Act
H.R. 479 – Wakefield Act
H.R. 1253 – Health Insurance Restrictions and Limitations Clarification Act of 2009
H.R. 1259 – Dextromethorphan Distribution Act of 2009
H.R. 577 – Vision Care for Kids Act of 2009
H.R. 985 – Free Flow of Information Act of 2009
H.R. 1029 – Alien Smuggling and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2009
H.R. 838 – Miami Dade College Land Conveyance Act
H.R. 151 – Daniel Webster Congressional Clerkship Act of 2009
H.R. 1299 – Capitol Police Administrative Technical Corrections Act of 2009
H.R. 1664 – To amend the executive compensation provisions of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 to prohibit unreasonable and excessive compensation and compensation not based on performance standards

If you have any energy left, consider sending a message telling them to slow down and READ THE BILLS.

Please fight this madness. Protest. Take action now. And thanks for being a part of the growing Downsize DC Army.

Perry Willis
Communications Director
DownsizeDC.org, Inc.

P.S. We’re currently working to fix some technical problems on our website. In the meantime, if you have trouble, try this . . .
 * Log-in using the log-in button near the upper right hand corner of our home page
 * Then go to our cut spending campaign to send your message to Congress

D o w n s i z e r – D i s p a t c h
is the official email list of DownsizeDC.org, Inc. & Downsize DC Foundation
Normally published 3 – 6 times per week.

CONTRIBUTE in support of the “Educate the Powerful System”

http://www.DownsizeDC.org is sponsored by DownsizeDC.org, Inc. — a non-profit educational organization promoting the ideas of individual liberty, personal responsibility, free markets, and small government.  Operations office: 1931 15th St. Cuyahoga Falls, OH 44223, 202.521.1200

Codex, bio-pirates and congressional complicity





surrender_forever_sLooming in our congress are several bills dedicated to the creation of a yet another bureaucracy which will be used to facilitate the usurping of US laws, standards and regulations in deference to international agreements and global committee edicts.


At stake here is what has been the most dynamic and productive agricultural system ever known….and the most safe.  Our congress has decided that preserving this system and allowing it to continue is not beneficial to corporate AG nor to the continued compliance relating to non-US laws and regulations.


The focus of every bill in congress devoted to fake [food safety] is aimed at eradicating any ability by non-corporate, non-industrialized farmers and ranchers to survive the financial and regulatory hardships that will result from these laws.  The forced compliance with Codex will effectively end independent farming and ranching here in the US, just as these things have done in other countries. 


The most immediate threat to US farmers and ranchers, to organic growers and producers is the global committee known as [Codex Alimentarius]  which has been in existence for decades.  Codex is comprised of ever expanding committees which culminate in the issuance of the Global Strategy.  The intent of the Global Strategy is to seize control of all food production from any source, by any means, centralizing food production in the hands of the governments of nation states and controlled by multi-national corporations who fund these assaults on humanity for profit.


Reading the PR pages for Codex, you could come away thinking this was a global initiative dedicated to making sure food production and supply for the worlds populations, that food safety and availability was being promoted with an eye to humanitarian causes was the aim.  You’d be wrong.  Codex is funded and supported by the same bio-pirates, the same corporate world raiders who are intent on converting food from a human right into one of tradable, sellable commodities.  Only those who can pay will eat.


Why are Codex and corporate lobbyists lunching with our elected officials?


Seldom has the detachment between congress and the people they swore to protect and defend, between our Constitution and sovereign laws and protections been more readily apparent than in the current flood of fake [food safety] bills and the intended mandatory National Animal Identification System.


Using phrases such as “best farming practices,  disease trace back and food safety” our congress is planning to use legislation to force the US into compliance with Codex and multiple other international agreements, regulations and standards. 


Not one of the bills currently being considered identifies the actual and real threats to our food supply.  China, which has repeatedly shipped contaminated food products into the US is allowed to continue unfettered.  Not once did our government concern itself with [food safety] nor act to defend us or to increase food inspection at ports of entry.  We might hurt China’s feelings and they may not want to ship any more of their garbage to us.  [Search:  Chinese contaminated food imports]


Citing contamination and the risk of food borne illnesses, congress again fails [or refuses] to cite the real and documented source of these risks domestically which occurs 95% of the time in processing…not production.  The outbreaks of salmonella, ecoli, and listeria, and other contamination do not occur in production.  These occur as the result of processors failing to adhere to sanitary standards but these days most processing plants are owned by corporate AG and profit far outweighs public safety.  In almost every known case of contamination, the source has been traced to processing plants or to contaminated products from foreign countries, not to domestic growers and producers.


So do all the fake food safety bills address any of these known problems?  Are you kidding?


Nothing in these bills does anything other than establish another federal agency which will be used to terrorize and harass independent agricultural and livestock producers while turning a blind eye and a deaf ear to corporate corruption and known sources of contamination from processing and imports which go un-inspected. 


Who is looking out for us?

No one!  Your own elected representatives and senators don’t give a damn what you think, and could care less how opposed you might be to these assaults on your freedom.


Democrats launched all these bills, but Republicans sit silently and don’t object; both parties are complicit in this assault on America.


Both parties have been instrumental in the economic disaster that has brought us to the brink of collapse as a country.   Now……they are coming after our access to food. 


© 2009 Marti Oakley




Campaign for Liberty…….www.blogtalkradio.com/john-wallace

1 Comment


This week I will be talking about the many things that are going on in America today that threaten our individual freedoms, liberties and our nation’s sovereignty. People are encouraged to call it.
If you have specific questions, on this or any other subject, please call the show whilce it is on the air (646-200-0326) and or email your questions or opinions to me and I will read them on the air.
Click on the link below for more information about the show and or to listen to the show.
If you, or a member of your organization, would like to be on the show, or you would like us to dedicate a show to a specific topic of interest, please email me at: john@NYCampaignForLiberty.com .
American Politics with John Wallace

PS: Please visit our OnLine newspaper  www.LibertyNewsOnLine.com  

We are still looking for authors and reporters.
John Wallace
“For Freedom, Liberty and Sovereignty”
New York Campaign for Liberty
Chatham, New York


Gun Control & The False Left-Right Paradigm

Leave a comment

To read the news, lately, it would seem that we have the so-called “liberal left” gun grabbers on one side vs. the “conservative” Republican “defenders of the Second Amendment” on the other, which of course, includes the National Rifle Association (NRA). No other version of the debate over gun control is ever offered or publicized by the corporate-controlled mainstream media. Thus, the debate is framed in a false perspective in which the only options are to either favor gun control or to favor less of it – while leaving the bulk of it in place. What the public doesn’t understand is that this still violates the Second Amendment.

There is a third option, one that lies outside the false left-right paradigm, and that is the Constitutionalist option, which would demand the full repeal of all gun laws. This is the only option that is truly in support of protecting the Second Amendment. Anything else simply allows the Second Amendment to remain eviscerated – if not to remove it entirely.

As I have written before, one doesn’t compromise with our inalienable rights. The moment we begin to do so is the moment we have kissed those rights goodbye. That moment was allowed to occur seventy-five years ago, with the passage of the first gun control law, the National Firearms Act of 1934 and the fallout from that act has been accumulating ever since – with the full blessing of both “sides” of the false left-right paradigm.

While so-called Democrats have historically campaigned openly for more and tighter gun controls – if not the outright banning of guns – thus, playing the role of the “bad guys” in the debate (depending upon which side of the false left-right paradigm you look at it from), the “opposing” side – the so-called “conservative Republicans” – have played their “good guy” role, pretending to be staunch defenders of the Second Amendment, while voting in favor of many gun control laws and never demanding the repeal of the hundreds of existing gun control laws. Thus, the so-called “right-wing,” with its tough-sounding anti-gun control rhetoric, creates a facade of standing up for our constitutional rights, all the while supporting policy that leaves gun control intact and even allows it to continue growing.

As I have pointed out before, the NRA – the nation’s oldest and most vocal (as well as best funded) “gun rights” organization is the tip of the spear on the phony “conservative” side, having pretended for seventy-five years to be fighting against infringement of the Second Amendment while, at the same time, endorsing more laws that violate it. Even when they are endorsing laws that give the appearance of “lifting restrictions” or of “granting rights” to gun owners, they are still knowingly supporting gun control, as that is what these laws truly are. The only thing that is necessary to restore the Second Amendment – and the only action that will do so – is to repeal all the laws that violate it, in the first place. The NRA has never advocated this. Instead, they have played their role in the false left-right paradigm, pretending that asking the government to not infringe the Second Amendment quite so much as they have been is somehow a “victory” for gun owners. It is not. Anything short of full repeal does not serve the interests of anyone but the gun grabbers and until all gun control laws have been repealed, we will always remain vulnerable to the specter of gun confiscation.

While the gun control advocates of the so-called “left” are perfectly obvious (they’re supposed to be. That’s their role), not as obvious and, thus, even more dangerous to our liberties, are those on the so-called “right” who make the pretense of being defenders of the Second Amendment. It is harder for a dumbed-down public to see through their charade and to realize that both “sides” serve the same agenda.

One example of this is Rep. Mary Fallon (R-Oklahoma), who serves my district. I have met Mary Fallon, just before her election to Congress. This was before I had awakened to the horrific fact our own government staged 9/11. Once I was aware of this and had begun researching the New World Order, I found, among many things, that Mary Fallon was among those to have supported the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007. Fallon is but one of many in Congress who are engaged in the same sort of subterfuge.

This morning, I read an article by Rep. Fallon, in which she refers to herself as a member of the NRA and pledges that she will “continue to support the Second Amendment to our Constitution.”She is playing her role to the hilt, arguing against the passage of H.R. 45, a massive bill that will greatly infringe the Second Amendment, but then, she’s supposed to argue against it, as the NRA is appearing to do, as part of the act. Later, as usual, there will be an NRA-backed “compromise” version of the bill that will fly through the Congress, mark my words. The result: the NRA and its supporters on the phony “right” will appear to have, once again, gallantly defended the Second Amendment and they will even be lauded for having achieved a “great victory” for the Second Amendment by allowing a slightly less dangerous version of yet another gun control law to come into existence, further violating the Second Amendment. This is how they operate. By pretending to fight against further restrictions, they are actually approving them, and the NRA has been doing this for decades.

Of course, the public doesn’t know enough about “our” Constitution to realize that it is the Federalist Constitution of 1787 that laid the groundwork for the rise of a large central government with a central bank and that our original constitution, The Articles of Confederation, was replaced by it for exactly that purpose. The Articles of Confederation didn’t necessitate any amendments to protect our rights because it was written to protect them all, in the first place and provided a far superior system of checks and balances for doing so. The Federalists, who were agents of the Rothschilds – the international bankers who sought (and still seek) to rule the world through the control of its money supply – had a mission to accomplish for their masters in London and that mission was to scrap the Articles of Confederation and replace it with a constitution that guaranteed the eventual growth of central government power. We see the result of their success all around us today.

Governments have, historically, never relinquished their power willingly and the biggest threat to a fascistic government is an aware, armed populace. The founders knew this and they also knew that, unchecked, our government would become just as despotic as every government before it had. Thus, the Second Amendment was included in the Constitution to secure our existing right to self-defense.

The Bill of Rights was tacked onto the Constitution, not by “the founders,” as we were told in our government run schools, but by the seldom mentioned Anti-Federalists who opposed the Federalist Constitution, to begin with and who insisted upon protecting our rights by adding a Bill of Rights and the ten Amendments to the Federalist Constitution. The two factions fought tooth and nail over this, the Federalists fighting to exclude these additional measures, as they were not aligned with the objectives of their corporate masters in London.

For all we know, the Anti-Federalists may well have been role-playing, just as the NRA and the Republicans are today. They succeeded in getting a Bill of Rights and the ten amendments added to the Constitution, but, obviously, that wasn’t sufficient to prevent the rise of a centralized totalitarian state, for the Federalist Constitution itself laid the groundwork for that centralization, despite the addition of the Bill of Rights and the ten amendments. Perhaps, as today, that was also by design. We may never know the truth.

Privatisation and commercialisation of seed–There is a global effort — some call it a master plan

Leave a comment

Ground Reality                                                                              farmer_s


by Devinder Sharma

Let there be no doubt. There is a global effort — some call it a master plan — (involving not only seed corporations, but also governments, CGIAR and the FAO) to control the entire seed heritage. Privatisation and commercialisation of seed, which means through it controlling the entire food chain, began several decades ago. With governments, CGIAR/World Bank/FAO facilitating the process, the private seed companies are slowly and steadily ensuring that farmers all over the world fall in line. They are left with no choice but to buy seed every cropping season from the agribusiness companies.

The new seeds are not only being genetically modified but are also being genetically programmed. We will talk about the genetic programming of these seeds sometimes later, but first let us look at the ways of the seed mafia.

The WTO provides the legal instruments to make it possible. Strengthening of intellectual proprietary control over seed comes through UPOV and WIPO, both being the public face of the seed industry. These IPRs are being further tightened through the Free Trade Agreements (FTAs), bilateral and regional agreements. All these agreements seek IPR-Plus treatments, and developing country governmets are being made to swallow the bitter pill.

The governments are more than willing to facilitate the process. India is a classic example, where the Agriculture Ministry appears to be on a fast track mode to increase the seed relacement ratio. In the next 15-20 years, it wants to replace 50 per cent of the farmers seed with so called ‘improved seeds’ being produced and marketed by the private companies. No wonder, more than 500 seed companies are operating India now. All looking forward to the farmers pocket, keen to take out the last penny from his soiled kurta.

As the article below (excerpted from the book Seeds of Deception by Jeffrey Smith) tells us briefly, an alert civil society and some farming groups worldwide have slowed down the process of takeover of the seed supply — as per the master plan. For the full article, scroll down to the end of this post.

On May 23, 2003, President Bush proposed an Initiative to End Hunger in Africa [1] using genetically modified (GM) foods. He also blamed Europe’s “unfounded, unscientific fears” of these foods for thwarting recovery efforts. Bush was convinced that GM foods held the key to greater yields, expanded U.S. exports, and a better world. His rhetoric was not new. It had been passed down from president to president, and delivered to the American people through regular news reports and industry advertisements.

The message was part of a master plan that had been crafted by corporations determined to control the world’s food supply. This was made clear at a biotech industry conference in January 1999, where a representative from Arthur Anderson Consulting Group explained how his company had helped Monsanto create that plan.

First, they asked Monsanto what their ideal future looked like in fifteen to twenty years. Monsanto executives described a world with 100 percent of all commercial seeds genetically modified and patented. Anderson Consulting then worked backwards from that goal, and developed the strategy and tactics to achieve it. They presented Monsanto with the steps and procedures needed to obtain a place of industry dominance in a world in which natural seeds were virtually extinct.

Integral to the plan was Monsanto’s influence in government, whose role was to promote the technology worldwide and to help get the foods into the marketplace quickly, before resistance could get in the way. A biotech consultant later said, “The hope of the industry is that over time, the market is so flooded that there’s nothing you can do about it. You just sort of surrender.” [2]

The anticipated pace of conquest was revealed by a conference speaker from another biotech company. He showed graphs projecting the year-by-year decrease of natural seeds, estimating that in five years, about 95 percent of all seeds would be genetically modified.

While some audience members were appalled at what they judged to be an arrogant and dangerous disrespect for nature, to the industry this was good business. Their attitude was illustrated in an excerpt from one of Monsanto’s advertisements: “So you see, there really isn’t much difference between foods made by Mother Nature and those made by man. What’s artificial is the line drawn between them.” [3]

To implement their strategy, the biotech companies needed to control the seeds-so they went on a buying spree, taking possession of about 23 percent of the world’s seed companies. Monsanto did achieve the dominant position, capturing 91 percent of the GM food market. [4] But the industry has not met their projections of converting the natural seed supply. Citizens around the world, who do not share the industry’s conviction that these foods are safe or better, have not “just sort of surrendered.”

Widespread resistance to GM food has resulted in a global showdown. U.S. exports of genetically modified corn and soy are down, and hungry African nations won’t even accept the crops as food aid. Monsanto is faltering financially and is desperate to open new markets. The U.S. government is convinced that EU resistance is the primary obstacle and is determined to change that. On May 13, 2003, the U.S. filed a lawsuit with the World Trade Organization (WTO), charging that the European Union’s restrictive policy on GM food violates international agreements.

On the day the WTO suit was filed, U.S. Trade Representative Robert Zoellick declared, “Overwhelming scientific research shows that biotech foods are safe and healthy.” [5] This has been industry’s chant from the start. It is the key assumption at the basis of their master plan, the WTO challenge, and the president’s campaign to end hunger. It is also, however, untrue.
The following chapters reveal that it was industry influence, not sound science, which allowed these foods onto the market. Moreover, if overwhelming scientific research suggests anything, it is that the foods should never have been approved.


[1] See the White House press release on this available here. The comments mentioned are about two-thirds of the way down the web page.
[2] Stuart Laidlaw, “StarLink Fallout Could Cost Billions,” The Toronto Star, Jan. 9, 2001. Article can be purchased in the Toronto Star archives available here, or find a free copy by clicking here.
[3] Robert Cohen, Milk, The Deadly Poison, Argus Publishing, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1998, p. 133
[4] See www.foodfirst.org/media/news/2003/butterfliesvsusda.html
[5] See www.ustrade-wto.gov/03052102.html

(See the full article at: http://www.opednews.com/articles/Seeds-of-Deception-10-pg-by-Rady-Ananda-090322-919.html)

Posted By Devinder Sharma to Ground Reality at 3/24/2009 08:34:00 AM

Opposition to NAIS grows….The Official Poultry Bookstore.com Blog

1 Comment

Monday, March 23, 2009

Opposition to NAIS grows
NAIS has been treated by most reporters and news organizations as a niche issue, not of interest to its general audience. It’s as if because this affects farmers, the consumers who eat what farmers grow don’t have to be concerned. That’s changing fast across the nation.

The New York Times published an OpEd opposing NAIS March 10, http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/11/opinion/11hayes.html?_r=1&th&emc=th. Shannon Hayes, the author of “The Grassfed Gourmet Cookbook” and the forthcoming “Radical Homemakers,” wrote it from the small farmer’s perspective.

“The burden for a program that would safeguard agribusiness interests would be disproportionately shouldered by small farmers, rural families and consumers of locally produced food. Worse yet, that burden would force many rural Americans to lose not only the family business, but our way of life,” she concludes.

Huffington Post published its own piece last week on March 16, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alison-rose-levy/having-a-cow-and-eating-i_b_175211.html. Written by Alison Rose Levy, the column attacks NAIS for its ineffectiveness in improving food safety. That’s not the issue that USDA has proposed as justification for NAIS, but it has inevitably become confabulated with the issue of animal disease, the stated focus. She confuses the FDA with the USDA in the column, but that confusion reflects how the alphabet soup of federal agencies confuses us all. Her reasoning is correct and getting attention in the general media for NAIS is dead serious.

A related issue is Collin Peterson, D-Minn, chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, http://agriculture.house.gov/index.shtml. The Sacramento Bee says he must go, after having damaged a valuable public lands bill by adding an unrelated amendment to allow concealed loaded weapons in national parks to accommodate the National Rifle Association, http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1695853.html?mi_rss=Opinion.

The NRA isn’t the only organization pulling Peterson’s strings. He’s been a mouthpiece for industrial agriculture throughout his tenure chairing the ag committee, with pockets jingling, frowning brow and mouth full throttle. Every farmer would agree—It’s time for him to go home.

Govt gives China Eminent Domain options to guarantee debt.


This was posted on Green Dragon Inn……you can access Green Dragon using the link on our blogroll. 

Govt gives China Eminent Domain options to guarantee debt.

Beijing, China — The United States of America has tendered to China a written agreement which grants to the People’s Republic of China, an option to exercise Eminent Domain within the USA, as collateral for China’s continued purchase of US Treasury Notes and existing US Currency reserves!

On February 11, Bloomberg Business News reported that China was seeking “guarantees” for its US Government debt (Story Here), and it now appears they got it. Well placed senior sources at the US Embassy in Beijing CONFIRM the formal written agreement was delivered by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton during her recent trip to China.

This means that in the event the US Government defaults on its financial obligations to China, the Communist Government of China would be permitted to physically take — inside the USA — land, buildings, factories, perhaps even entire cities – to satisfy the financial obligations of the US government.

Put simply, the feds have actually mortgaged the physical land and property of all citizens and businesses in the United States. They have given to a foreign power, their Constitutional power to “take” all of our property, as actual collateral for continued Chinese funding of US deficit spending and the continued carrying of US national debt.

This is an unimaginable betrayal of every man, woman and child in the USA. An outrage worthy of violent overthrow.

Eminent Domain is the power of government to TAKE private property for public use without the consent of the property owner. Under our Constitution, the government can only “take” when providing “just compensation” for what they’ve taken.

Who decides what constitutes “just compensation?” The government!

in past “takings” homeowners who felt the government was not paying them enough for property have filed lawsuits. In absolutely every such case, the value placed upon the property by the government was upheld by the courts.

Our federal government has now granted to China, this power to “take” our homes and businesses in the event the US Gov’t defaults on its debts.

Let’s play this out as a worst case scenario. . . . . .

The US Gov’t goes belly-up and China comes in and says, “they owed us $700 Billion in Treasury Notes and another $2 Trillion in actual cash money which is now worthless. We are taking the entire state of Hawaii and the entire state of California in lieu of this bad debt. ”

With the stroke of a Chinese chop stick, Hawaii and California — all the land and buildings in those states — are now owned by China.

The “taking” would be a “valid public use” because it was “taken” in payment of the public debt!!!!

China could then turn around and declare the value of all that land to be worth. . . . . I dunno, ten cents on a dollar?

If you own a $200,000 house in either state, you get a Chinese check for $20,000.

Needless to say, the property owners would go ballistic and demand “just compensation” for what was taken. Who gets to decide what is “just?” China!

Don’t think you got a fair price for what they took? No problem, sue China. You’ll lose.

People who live in those states and own their land outright, might be able to negotiate with China to “rent” back what used to be their own property, as long as they continue to pay all their taxes (to China) ; but the land and buildings would belong to China!

This is what our own Government has just done to us and it is the single most vile act of betrayal in the history of human existence.

State Governments Knew This Was Coming

In early February nine U.S. States began the process of re-asserting their Sovereignty pursuant to the Ninth and Tenth Amendments to the US Constitution; declaring null and void any actions by Congress that violated the Constitution.

At the time, I wrote about those state efforts (Here) and wondered why so many states were taking-up such an arcane issue in such a seemingly urgent fashion. I guess now, we know why.

The states were obviously privy to what the feds were planning to do with granting Eminent Domain to China. The states took action to make certain the feds couldn’t give away cities or the states themselves!

This situation is going to get VERY ugly, VERY fast as one sovereign power (the feds) tries to literally give away the land of other sovereign powers, (the states). This is the type of thing that starts Civil War.

Our present federal government makes the treachery and betrayal of Benedict Arnold look like child’s play.



My Response To MIAC Report…….By Chuck Baldwin

1 Comment

March 24, 2009 

This column is archived at




By now, readers should be familiar with the Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC) report dated 02/20/09 and titled, “MIAC Strategic Report: The Modern Militia Movement.” In this dreadfully malicious and slanderous “law enforcement sensitive” secret police report, Governor Jeremiah (Jay) Nixon; John Britt, Director of the Missouri Department of Public Safety; James Keathley, Colonel, Missouri State Highway Patrol; and Van Godsey, Director of MIAC categorize certain citizens as being potential violence-prone “militia members.” I would venture to guess that more than 75% of the entire population of the United States would fit the MIAC’s broad definition of someone who would fall into the aforementioned category.


According to the MIAC report, if you oppose any of the following, you could qualify for being profiled as a potential dangerous “militia member”:


The United Nations

The New World Order

Gun Control

The violation of Posse Comitatus

The Federal Reserve

The Income Tax

The Ammunition and Accountability Act

A possible Constitutional Convention

The North American Union

Universal Service Program

Radio Frequency Identification (RFID)


Illegal Immigration


Again, I would bet that at least 75% of the American people would oppose at least one or more items on the above list. Well, according to the MIAC report, that is sufficient to make them potential dangerous “militia members.”


However, it is the following statement contained in the MIAC report that is particularly disturbing to yours truly. Under the heading “Political Paraphernalia,” the report states, “Militia members most commonly associate with 3rd party political groups. It is not uncommon for militia members to display Constitutional [sic] Party, Campaign for Liberty, or Libertarian material. These members are usually supporters of former Presidential Candidate [sic]: Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin, and Bob Barr.”


The obvious inference of the above statement links Ron Paul, Bob Barr, and myself to potential dangerous “militia members.” The broader implication is that the millions of people who supported Ron Paul, Bob Barr, or myself are likewise categorized as potential dangerous “militia members.” This is a classic case of broad-brushed police profiling. Can you imagine the fallout of this preposterous report had the names Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and Maxine Waters been used instead of the names Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin, and Bob Barr?


Accordingly, Ron Paul, Bob Barr, and I wrote a formal letter to the above-named Missouri officials demanding “that the following-described document be immediately removed from any and all websites associated with or maintained by the state of Missouri or any agency thereof, including the MIAC; that the said document no longer be circulated by the state of Missouri or any agency thereof or associated therewith; and that the state of Missouri repudiate its references to the three of us contained therein.”


To view the full text of our letter to Governor Nixon of Missouri, go here:




Ladies and gentlemen, we simply cannot allow this kind of police profiling to continue. I assure you, this phenomenon is not limited to the State of Missouri. Every state that has a “Fusion Center” is being fed this kind of nonsense on a regular basis. You and I are commonly referred to as “extremists” in these secret police reports. This has been happening in earnest for the past couple of months and is operating under the auspices of the federal Department of Homeland Security. And people with a public platform (such as myself, Ron Paul, Bob Barr, and a host of others) are now being singled out by name. How long will it be before police agencies begin “picking up and hauling away” those people whose names are mentioned in these reports? It may be sooner than we think.


To see if your state has a “Fusion Center,” go here:




The only thing that will stymie this nonsense is a huge public outcry opposing it. Yes, the people of this country (that means YOU) still have the power to put a stop to this kind of totalitarian thinking. If we do nothing, however, it will soon be too late to stop it. We either stop it now, or it will quickly mushroom into a leviathan that will both monitor and control the personal opinions and speech of every man, woman, and child in this country. No, I am not exaggerating.


The Feds already monitor virtually every phone call, email, and public speech in the country. How long before these secret police reports will be used as justification to arrest and incarcerate people because of their ideas and opinions, labeling them as a “threat” or as “dangerous” to society?


Here is the contact information for the appropriate officials in Missouri:


Email address: Brandon.middleton@mshp.dps.mo.gov


Missouri Information Analysis Center

Division of Drugs & Crime Control

P. O. Box 568

Jefferson City, MO 65102-0568

Phone: 573-751-6422

Toll Free: 866-362-6422

Fax: 573-751-9950


And while you are at it, you should also contact the state police agency as well as the governor’s office in your state, especially if your state has a “Fusion Center” (see web site above). Mark it down: if you have ever publicly opposed any of the above-mentioned issues or organizations, or have ever publicly supported an independent Presidential candidate, YOU ARE BEING PROFILED RIGHT NOW!


We await the State of Missouri’s response. In the meantime, what are you going to do?


P.S. Even as this column is being distributed, we have just received a reply from the Director of the Missouri Department of Public Safety, John Britt. I will analyze and respond to this statement in my next column.



Treasury Secretary does not work for the United States


By: Marti Oakley (c) copyright 2009- 2010 All RIGHTS RESERVED


 See also: Where is that illusive US treasury? Can you say Puerto Rico?


The appointment of a Secretary of the Treasury is just that, an appointment to a position which is NOT a cabinet position in any administration.  The S.o.T. is the [governor] appointed to the World Bank, International Monetary Fund (IMF).  He is not an officer of the United States, is not a cabinet member and does not represent the interests of the United States.  His position is as liaison between the federal government and the IMF.  His obligation is to the IMF, not to the United States.  The secretary of the Treasury is not sworn into office as cabinet members are, and take no oaths to the United States. 


Just today, the subcommittee hearings on AIG and how the bailouts had been constructed, were held.  Repeatedly, Geithner uses the term “your government” when responding to questions from committee members.  He never says “our government” or “the government”.  Geithner uses the term “your government” to distinguish himself as an employee of the IMF/World Bank, and to make clear that he is NOT a cabinet member working on behalf of the US government.  Geithner repeatedly alludes to the central bank which is neither a US agency or organization but rather a privately owned and regulated banking cartel.    


How many of you sitting out there actually believe there is a US bank account somewhere in this country containing tax deposits from workers, and funds generated by all the businesses the federal government unconstitutionally engages in, or any of the other contrived sources of income that comprise the revenues of the federal government?


I have news for you; there isn’t any such account.  All funds collected including our tax dollars are deposited in the World Bank and administered by the International Monetary Fund. 


The Federal Reserve Act of 1913 abolished the United States treasury, ended the cabinet position and created the IMF governorships.  Each country being a member of the IMF has its own governor.  When Timothy Geithner or Henry Paulson speak of the G-8, or the G-20, they are speaking of the meetings of governors whose purpose it is to determine what plan or action would benefit the IMF, not the countries involved.  Their purpose of meeting is not to act to benefit the countries represented, but rather to act to protect the interests of the IMF.


The IMF and World Bank are also the issuers of all government checks some of which still bear the name U.S. Treasury.  Most checks emanating from government no longer even pretend to come from this fictional U.S. Bank account.


  • In addition, every Social Security number is issued by the IMF, not the federal government operating as the Social Security Administration.
  • Every birth certificate with registration number is originated from and  registered with the IMF/World Bank
  • Every Veterans award
  • All military pay
  • All government paychecks
  • All payments of any kind emanating from the Federal government are paid through the IMF/World Bank.


The careful depositing of the term [central bank] will occur more frequently as a matter of psychological conditioning as we are forced into a privately owned, world wide banking system.  Once this is forced on us, the demise of the Federal Reserve will follow as it is absorbed into the one world, bank and its existence is no longer needed to facilitate the manipulation of debt and economies as that function will now be openly orchestrated by the central bank.  


The World Bank and IMF are expansions of the Federal Reserve central banking system.  Paulson, and now Geithner openly allude to the [central bank], a term which should frighten even the most apathetic among us.  In the past no one directly mentioned the connection to the World Bank, but as economies around the world have been intentionally imploded in order to pave the way for acceptance of a world wide central banking system the term is used openly; that way you’ll get used to it and won’t go into rebellious shock when your dollars are converted to toilet paper. 




NAIS~~~ Mother Of All Ag Bribes

1 Comment



National Assn. of Farm Animal Welfare~~

by Darol Dickinson, www.naisSTINKS.com   3/21/09

Attached is the USDA spread sheet for NAIS bribes—- sanitized as [cooperative agreements].

These are the funds received by tribes, states, government employees and companies who promise to enroll properties for USDA. Listed is only a scintilla of the cost. Every veterinarian, county extension agent, and ASCS office employee has been coerced to distribute NAIS literature and “speak kindly” about enrolling. The real cost is well above published data required by law. There are millions being spent monthly. Check it out at:



The National Pork Board got their trough filled with $800,000. That is why USDA tapped them for the emphatic NAIS report to the Subcommittee hearing March 11. The hogs are bought. In the funeral business these are called “rental pallbearers.” (Not about friendships, just money for the moment.)

FFA got $359,995 to sign up their kids before they could show at fairs. The hesitant children who refuse are considered rebels and malcontents.

American Angus Assn got $594,585 to hammer the horns off their members.

They also used the $$ to hammer enrollments from non AAA member Angus clients of AAA members who did not surrender to NAIS.

The Holstein Assn made a bold strong testimony at the hearing. They stuck $1,754,428 in the milk bucket so they were glad to brag about NAIS before Congress. Their milk drinking political wing National Milk Producers Assn stuck $1,027,000 in the milk tank from USDA. That is why dairies were forced to enroll property or they could not sell their milk. They closed down numerous Amish dairies with this dirty heartless trick.

Notice the Indian tribes are the most numerous to have coins placed in their teepees? The tribal leaders cut the deals with USDA and automatically listed tribe members who had livestock. The numbers are jumbled together so you can’t locate the total Indian enrollments. (Some Indian tribes have tribal managed herds so every tribe member receives a percentage of the income. This would let every tribe member unknowingly enroll in NAIS.)

USDA gets to collect and govern the Beef Checkoff millions. The state groups and numerous hands that get these $$$ all promote NAIS. They all love NAIS?

The Beef Checkoff should not be collected and managed by USDA? USDA has habitual holes in their bucket.

Massachusetts has a 227% property sign up. The Ag Census reports that the US has over 3,910,022 farms that qualify to enroll in mandatory NAIS. USDA says there are 1.4 million. Therefore, when they get 100% sign-up there will be another 200% left freely roaming the barn yard.

By real numbers they have 9.7% signed up now, not 35% as USDA falsely, under oath, told Congress. If you removed the Indian “bribe” enrollments the USDA has about 4% of the US properties “volunteered.” How sad the USDA has become? Every one should be so ashamed of this expensive dismal branch of the government.

Bribery is not always frugal when spending other people’s money. In fact this project has wasted truck loads of tax money. The cost per person enrolled for NAIS property is a putrid fact.

The sickest is Rhode Island with an expenditure of $169,520 and only 15 people surrendered.

Alaskan farmers cost $3,083 each.

California $708.  

Connecticut $1,994.  

Hawaii $1,085.  

Montana $1,452.

New Mexico $695.  

Wyoming $1,119.  

Vermont $5,776.

Those who spend other’s money, in the case of NAIS, have had amateur supervision from USDA with the appearance of no remorse.

The Washington DC wealth distributors have given USDA a $138,000,000 property sign up budget and more is on the way. As the spread sheet shows, some $40 million is concealed. As a fungible issue this may involve homes in the islands, company planes or “ladies of the night.”

We live in a day that bribes, campaign donations, and cooperative agreements are highly respected in nearly every association, tribe and government office.

USDA uses subject’s tax money to bribe universities and USDA outlets to demand specific performances. Few government offices have the courage to refuse a nice sweet bribe regardless of the smell of Machiavellianizm.

NAIS is the farm issue of the hour. USDA has been to the vault to drink the Kool-Aid. You, the enforced ones, call your enforcers and remind them —- an election is coming.

Don’t fund one penny to NAIS!! Stop this scam now!!

For more info






A Call to Boycott Monsanto – Seminis Seeds

Leave a comment

Farm Wars

Monsanto is not only overtly taking over the seed market, but covertly also. Did you know that Seminis, “the largest developer, grower and marketer of fruit and vegetable seeds in the world,” is owned by Monsanto? Here is a blurb from the company website:

Seminis sells vegetable seeds in more than 155 countries. In addition to the corporate site, we have 10 regional/country-specific Web sites with useful information about local products and contact information….Seminis’ parent company, Monsanto, announced plans to acquire Netherlands-based vegetable seeds company, De Ruiter Seeds. LINK

Seminis is a wholesaler, so chances are if you purchase seeds at your local store, or website, the company will have purchased seeds from Seminis/Monsanto.

Seminis offers more than 3,000 seed varieties in 25 fruit and vegetable crops. We do not work with tree fruit, grapes, berries, potatoes and other crops that are plant propagated. (seminis.com)

The company is very proud of their seedless varieties of watermelon and peppers. And why shouldn’t it be? No seeds, no seed saving. READ MORE…


1 Comment



How The NSA Illegally And Unconstitutionally Harasses Law-Abiding Americans Everyday. How, you ask? Quite simply, actually. It’s done by EMF or ELF Radio Waves, and a technology known as “Remote Neural Monitoring”.
Haven’t you ever wondered about that ringing in your left ear? Well, here are the reason(s).

And just why should the NSA do this, you ask? To silence any who who dare to speak out against them or any other agency, or the Government
or simply to think for themselves, and “outside the box”, if you will. Think not? Then, read on……….

Posted By Beat The Chip to Beat The Chip at 3/16/2009 12:56:00 AM

Proposed bill slams Fed, allows payments in precious metals



State considers return to gold, silver dollars
By Drew Zahn- WorldNetDaily

A bill being considered in the Montana Legislature blasts the Federal Reserve’s role in America’s money policy and permits the state to conduct business in gold and silver instead of the Fed’s legal tender notes.

Montana H.B. 639, sponsored by State Rep. Bob Wagner, R-Harrison, doesn’t require the state or citizens to conduct business in gold or silver, but it does require the state to calculate certain transactions in both the current legal tender system and in an electronic gold currency. It further mandates that the state must accept payments in gold or silver for various fees and purchases.

While Wagner was unavailable for comment, the bill’s language clearly alleges the nation’s current financial system, with its reliance on the private Federal Reserve system for money supply, is a danger to American freedom.

“The absence of gold and silver coin, whether in that form or in the form of an electronic gold currency, as media of exchange,” the bill states, “abridges, infringes on and interferes with the sovereignty and independence of this state … and exposes this state and Montana citizens, inhabitants and businesses to chronic problems and potentially serious crises that may arise from the economic and political instability of the present domestic and international systems of coinage, currency, banking and credit.”

Further, the bill states, relying only on the depreciating legal tender issued by the Fed subjects citizens to “losses in purchasing power” inflicted by the government, a dilemma the bill says amounts to the “incremental confiscation” of property by government in violation of the U.S. Constitution’s protections for just compensation and due process.

The Fifth Amendment states, “No person shall be … deprived of life, liberty or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”

Critics of the current financial system argue that using Federal Reserve notes as legal tender, rather than gold- or silver-backed currency, means the value of Americans’ money � and thus their “property” � is siphoned away by inflation, a process perpetuated by the government’s reliance on legal tender. Gold and silver, critics say, don’t lose their value on the whims of the Federal Reserve.

U.S. Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, even favors abolishing the Fed’s system of fiat currency to return to dollars backed by gold.

“Throughout its nearly 100-year history, the Federal Reserve has presided over the near-complete destruction of the United States dollar,” the Texas Republican said. “Since 1913 the dollar has lost over 95 percent of its purchasing power, aided and abetted by the Federal Reserve’s loose monetary policy.

“How long will we as a Congress stand idly by while hard-working Americans see their savings eaten away by inflation? Only big-spending politicians and politically favored bankers benefit from inflation,” he said.

Wagner joins legislators in several other states encouraging their respective governments to reconsider accepting gold as a form of payment. Indiana’s S.B. 453, Colorado’s H.B. 09-1206, Missouri’s H.B. 0561, Georgia’s H.B. 430 and Maryland’s H.J.R. 5 are among the gold currency bills introduced just this year in various legislatures.

Montana’s H.B. 639 has been referred to the Legislature’s State Administration Committee.

Seeds of Domination – the Monsanto Monopoly

Leave a comment

This is a 3 part video series done by the Organization for Competitive Markets regarding its concern that Monsanto is headed for a monopoly over agriculture seeds and our food supply.

Monsanto’s biotechnology patents control over 80% of corn and 90% of soybeans in the U.S. Farmers are going bankrupt, which leads to the importation of more of our food.

Watch this video series to understand how the monopoly started, and just where it is headed. Also, watch a reporter who takes a picture of a Monsanto sign from a public street being chased down by Monsanto security. This abomination of a company will stop at nothing.

By the way, did you know that your friendly fast food giant McDonald’s has partnered with Monsanto?

Watch Seeds of Domination HERE…


Lose your property for growing food?

1 Comment


Big Brother legislation could mean prosecution, fines up to $1 million

Posted: March 16, 2009
8:56 pm Eastern


By Chelsea Schilling
© 2009 WorldNetDaily


Some small farms and organic food growers could be placed under direct supervision of the federal government under new legislation making plant2aits way through Congress.

Food Safety Modernization Act

House Resolution 875, or the Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009, was introduced by Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., in February. DeLauro’s husband, Stanley Greenburg, works for Monsanto – the world’s leading producer of herbicides and genetically engineered seed.

DeLauro’s act has 39 co-sponsors and was referred to the House Agriculture Committee on Feb. 4. It calls for the creation of a Food Safety Administration to allow the government to regulate food production at all levels – and even mandates property seizure, fines of up to $1 million per offense and criminal prosecution for producers, manufacturers and distributors who fail to comply with regulations. 

Michael Olson, host of the Food Chain radio show and author of “Metro Farm,” told WND the government should focus on regulating food production in countries such as China and Mexico rather than burdening small and organic farmers in the U.S. with overreaching regulations.

“We need somebody to watch over us when we’re eating food that comes from thousands and thousands of miles away. We need some help there,” he said. “But when food comes from our neighbors or from farmers who we know, we don’t need all of those rules. If your neighbor sells you something that is bad and you get sick, you are going to get your hands on that farmer, and that will be the end of it. It regulates itself.”

Want your vegetables to grow like crazy? Get the amazing natural fertilizer designed to maximize taste and nutrient density!

The legislation would establish the Food Safety Administration within the Department of Health and Human Services “to protect the public health by preventing food-borne illness, ensuring the safety of food, improving research on contaminants leading to food-borne illness, and improving security of food from intentional contamination, and for other purposes.”

Federal regulators will be tasked with ensuring that food producers, processors and distributors – both large and small – prevent and minimize food safety hazards such as food-borne illnesses and contaminants such as bacteria, chemicals, natural toxins or manufactured toxicants, viruses, parasites, prions, physical hazards or other human pathogens.


Under the legislation’s broad wording, slaughterhouses, seafood processing plants, establishments that process, store, hold or transport all categories of food products prior to delivery for retail sale, farms, ranches, orchards, vineyards, aquaculture facilities and confined animal-feeding operations would be subject to strict government regulation.

Government inspectors would be required to visit and examine food production facilities, including small farms, to ensure compliance. They would review food safety records and conduct surveillance of animals, plants, products or the environment.

“What the government will do is bring in industry experts to tell them how to manage all this stuff,” Olson said. “It’s industry that’s telling government how to set these things up. What it always boils down to is who can afford to have the most influence over the government. It would be those companies that have sufficient economies of scale to be able to afford the influence – which is, of course, industrial agriculture.”

Farms and food producers would be forced to submit copies of all records to federal inspectors upon request to determine whether food is contaminated, to ensure they are in compliance with food safety laws and to maintain government tracking records. Refusal to register, permit inspector access or testing of food or equipment would be prohibited.

“What is going to happen is that local agriculture will end up suffering through some onerous protocols designed for international agriculture that they simply don’t need,” Olson said. “Thus, it will be a way for industrial agriculture to manage local agriculture.”

Under the act, every food producer must have a written food safety plan describing likely hazards and preventative controls they have implemented and must abide by “minimum standards related to fertilizer use, nutrients, hygiene, packaging, temperature controls, animal encroachment, and water.”

“That opens a whole can of worms,” Olson said. “I think that’s where people are starting to freak out about losing organic agriculture. Who is going to decide what the minimum standards are for fertilization or anything else? The government is going to bring in big industry and say we are setting up these protocols, so what do you think we should do? Who is it going to bring in to ask? The government will bring in people who have economies of scale who have that kind of influence.”

DeLauro’s act calls for the Food Safety Administration to create a “national traceability system” to retrieve history, use and location of each food product through all stages of production, processing and distribution.

Olson believes the regulations could create unjustifiable financial hardships for small farmers and run them out of business.

“That is often the purpose of rules and regulations: to get rid of your competition,” he said. “Only people who are very, very large can afford to comply. They can hire one person to do paperwork. There’s a specialization of labor there, and when you are very small, you can’t afford to do all of these things.”

Olson said despite good intentions behind the legislation, this act could devastate small U.S. farms.

“Every time we pass a rule or a law or a regulation to make the world a better place, it seems like what we do is subsidize production offshore,” he said. “We tell farmers they can no longer drive diesel tractors because they make bad smoke. Well, essentially what we’re doing is giving China a subsidy to grow our crops for us, or Mexico or anyone else.”  READ THE REST OF THE STORY

The FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force Says YOU are a “Terrorist”


According to a document released by the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force, intended to “assist uniformed patrol officers in identifying potential domestic terrorism,” those who are “defenders of the Constitution” or who are “against the federal government and the UN,” or who “make numerous references to the U.S. Constitution” are to be considered as “terrorists.”

The FBI alert comes from the Phoenix, Arizona FBI office (201 East Indianola Avenue, Phonenix, AZ 85012) and bears the names and phone numbers of Investigator Al Shearer of the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office (602-650-3131) and Analyst Terry Chapman of the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office (602-256-1795) as contacts for further information. The Phoenix FBI office can be reached at 602-650-3163.

In light of this document and the recently publicized Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC) document, which makes the same sort of outrageous connections between third party candidates, their supporters and Neo-Nazi hate groups, it has become quite evident that this agenda to train police officers to see patriotic Amercian citizens as enemy combatants to be feared has become widespread. This certainly seems to be the case when one considers the FBI is a federal agency responsible for crime investigation nationwide and would have surely shared the same information with every police department in the United States.

MIAC Report Comes from Missouri “Fusion Center”


In tracking the issue of the recent report on the “Modern Militia Movement” by the Missouri Information Analysis Center – a document that labels Ron Paul supporters and people who respect the Constitution as “militia members” and “terrorists” – I have discovered that the MIAC is one of the many so-called “fusion centers” established around the country to combat voices dissenting against the government.

Established by the Department of Defense and the Department of Homeland Security in 2008, these fusion centers are located in major cities in every state and have facilities to monitor internet websites, chatrooms and message boards for any opinions not favorable to the federal government and to attack such opinions via the use of full-time personnel trained to troll the web looking for voices of dissent.

Lt. John Hotz of the Missouri State Highway Patrol has admitted this MIAC is, indeed a fusion center, established in Jefferson City, that combines the resources of the Department of Homeland Security with those of other agencies.

Interestingly enough, I have received no reply to an email sent to Brandon Middleton of the Missouri State Highway Patrol, whose email address is printed in the MIAC document and who is said to be the person who should be contacted for comments about this “alert.” Is Mr. Middleton hiding under his desk, deathly afraid to reply to this “terrorist?”

Sickened by the flawed information presented by the USDA

Leave a comment

March 16, 2009

To The Honorable David Scott

Chairman, House Committee on Agriculture

Subcommittee on Livestock, Dairy, and Poultry

1301 Longworth House Office Bldg.

Washington, D.C. 20515-6001


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


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


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


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


4) As per written testimony presented to you by Dr. Thornsberry, 47 states do not have a recorded case of any reportable livestock disease at this time. This is the lowest disease of record since Washington Prayed at Valley Forge. The current disease issue is minuscule. Future unknown disease will be even less, contrary to what you were told.


5) The only reportable disease is in Michigan, Minnesota and Yellow Stone. All are a result of government wildlife spreading disease to domestic livestock. Nothing in NAIS forces the government to comply with NAIS. Until the states and the federal government deal with their own disease it is a scam to force expensive unnecessary compliance on the private sector.


6) The USDA has briefed your elected leaders with “flawed data.” You were told that 35% of the livestock property owners have voluntarily enrolled in NAIS. The USDA was not correct. They have reduced their own 2007 census numbers of farms by 2,500,000 farms to impress you to believe they are succeeding in enrollments. Check it yourself, or I can tell you who to call at NASS to get honest data. The real NAIS number is less than 10% enrollment. It has been the most expensive enrollment of private property in world history.


7) The reason NAIS property enrollment is zip, livestock people don’t trust USDA or the

government. We are scared of you. You have us scared to death with talk of mandatory NAIS!!


8) Our elected officials are surrounded by people who don’t understand the livestock business. There are 3,000,000 livestock producers in the US who can tell you why they have not signed up for NAIS. Only 2 were allowed to testify last Wednesday.


9) You have been told the US must comply with World Trade Treaties to export livestock. You have been told exporting is imperative for good cattle prices in the US. You have not been told that beef, like oil, must be imported to feed the nation. The US is a net beef import nation and has not for dozens of years produced enough beef to feed the nation. USDA has not told you the truth! Call NASS and get the true data. USDA should use correct data!


10) The one time cost of NAIS compliance as proposed, will be over $30 per animal for a herd of 50 animals. USDA has given you false costs per animal using amortization rates for hundreds of units which represents only the nation’s few largest producers.


11) Due to the low profit margin, high cost of farm land, increasing competition with government for farm labor and vicious property taxes, nearly 2000 ranches are going out of business per month and have for dozens of years.


12) NAIS, as proposed will take the total income from the average farm for livestock

production—take it all. USDA has given you flawed information as to the positive things of NAIS and not told you the negatives. Either they don’t know or don’t care that NAIS will devastate the economics of agriculture in the US.


13) Disease has been vilified by USDA to scare elected officials. All livestock producers deal with disease in many forms and know how to handle it without government assistance. We already successfully do this.


14) You have been told that Hoof and Mouth disease would devastate the nation’s beef business. That is flawed data. Hoof and Mouth does not affect people and does not destroy cattle. It is a skin disease and the meat from H & M positive cattle is consumable and would pass USDA meat inspection.


15) If disease is as serious as USDA alleges, why don’t they invest in vaccines for prevention, instead of a costly 48 hour trace back? Answer, USDA leaders don’t understand the livestock business. Never has an ear tag stopped any infection.


16) USDA has underestimated the magnitude of NAIS clerical cost in relation to value received. The US census provides numbers to indicate over 2.3 billion critters in the US would require NAIS compliance.


17) Reliable data indicates the average bovine in the normal course of commerce has 8 owners during their earthly intact existence. NAIS would require a computer entry for each owner movement or transfer. Within 3 years the US NAIS numbers would more than equal the census of the earth’s human population. This breadth of costs does not justify the value.


18) USDA has failed to brief elected leaders that all states currently have animal transport laws in place with stringent penalties. No animal can cross any state line without a USDA certified veterinarian certificate and visual inspection paid for by the animal owner. All interstate transit is documented now. The owner, state of entry and state of departure are required by USDA to receive originals of this certificate. NAIS would be redundant and add to already existing enforcements.


19) USDA has briefed law makers of their fear of commingling as a disease transmittal explosion. From the earliest history of the nation livestock commingling events like rodeos, horse races and state fairs have not caused a problem due to health inspection rules by certified USDA veterinarians. These enforcements are now in place that have served the nation perfectly well.


20) USDA briefings have disregarded the great commitment private enterprise has contributed by scientifically providing vaccinations and health medications to deal with disease. These vaccines are more available in the US than any country in the world, therefore enabling livestock owners to maintain herds in excellent health without government assistance.


21) USDA has failed to brief law makers that the US is blessed with the most professional veterinarians of any country. All livestock disease is promptly identified on a local personal basis. USDA requires licensed veterinarians to report all diseases immediately to state USDA authorities. It is overkill to add to this current working system.


21) USDA will enforce NAIS with barbaric IES tactics. The recent combative raids on farms with fines proposed up to $500,000 have livestock producers trembling. The USDA’s IES has no valid oversight and no limit for their draconian enforcement. Gestapo tactics is a nice word for IES vicious conduct.


22) A June 2008 independent poll by Western Horseman magazine recorded thousands of online votes with 93.3% of livestock producers opposed to NAIS. This is why it has cost millions for USDA to get volunteer enrollment. Livestock producers don’t want anything to do with NAIS.


23) Testimony to your committee from a person outside the US indicated the burden on producers had not caused people to go broke. Michigan, a NAIS mandatory state fines people $5000 for not enrolling property. Farmers are liquidating Michigan land and moving to non mandatory NAIS states. One farm family moved to Belize to escape USDA assault. Thousands of Michigan farms are for sale this minute. People do not know where to escape to!


24) USDA has presented flawed testimony with quasi concern for animal health, safe food and export. USDA is concerned only with federal funding, USDA budget expansion, and USDA salary increases.


25) A prominent Ag Journalist wrote that if NAIS becomes mandatory the main USDA budget item will be incarceration and prison construction to contain all the farmers who refuse NAIS surrender.


Please share this information with your voting associates. I am available to substantiate all of the above information. Please do not destroy us with mandatory NAIS.


Darol Dickinson, 35000 Muskrat, Barnesville, Ohio USA, 740 758 5050


Does Supporting the Constitution Make Me a Terrorist?

Leave a comment

Click on  READ MORE to see Allison Bricker’s list of what qualifies any one of us to be listed as a ‘terrorist”.  Guess what…..if you are reading anything that opposes government policy or support the Constitution…..you’re already on there.  Thank the fine folks at your area Fusion Center for adding you to these lists.   Marti




March 15, 2009 at 9:26 am

by: Allison Bricker

This past week, sensitive documents from the Missouri Information Analysis Center were leaked to the public. The M.I.A.C. report designated “UNCLASSIFIED//LAW ENFORCEMENT SENSITIVE”, seeks to put supporters of Dr. Ron Paul, those tired of the endless banker bailouts, and just about anyone else who dare question the Federal government on par with Neo-Nazis and abortion clinic bombers.1

It disturbs me greatly to bear witness as our Federal government continues to expand its program of correlating dissent with domestic terrorism. Fellow readers, this despicable tactic is precisely why many of our Founding Fathers sought to engross humanity’s inherent liberties into the Constitution via The Bill of Rights. Among these rights derived solely from nature, is the right to free speech; even speech deemed unpopular or critical of one’s government.

Truth be told, the tactic of linking those criticizing the central authority as outright enemies of the state, whether it be king or government is as old as humanity itself. This is how students of the enlightenment, ergo Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, et al knew the absolute necessity of prohibiting government regulation of speech. The Founding generation witnessed first hand “Royal Governors” and legislatures executing and imprisoning their fellow colonists for speaking out against the crown.2 These unjust decrees backed by the weight of the sword, were necessary in the eyes of the loyalist governments. They feared dissent would gradually give rise to critical thinking, which in turn would demand answers and accountability, and thus dissent was seen as a direct threat to their ever corrupting grip on power. READ MORE

Open Letter to Chairman, House Committee on Agriculture


The Honorable David Scott

Chairman, House Committee on Agriculture

Subcommittee on Livestock, Dairy and Poultry

1301 Longworth House Office Building

Washington, D.C. 20515-6001


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


Dear Chairman Scott and Subcommittee Members:


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


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


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


Our government’s continual capitulation to these non-US laws and standards is creating an untenable system and jeopardizing US agriculture and what has been the most dynamic and well functioning agricultural system in the world.


The language in NAIS referring to landowners and to livestock owners has been changed to facilitate international agreements and standards, most especially Agenda 21 from the United Nations and World Trade Organization demands and the international committees operating under standards and regulations and other misnomers.


All the international agreements, standards, regulations and other instruments being deferred to, relegate the actual owner of the land to [operator] or [manager].  The Premises ID is a coercion of the voluntary abandonment of property to the control of the USDA, acting as agent for the Federal government. 


Livestock owners are now referred to as [stakeholders], implying an interest in, but not the owner of [the livestock].  As stakeholders, livestock owners would be subject to the rules, actions and intents of the USDA and as [stakeholders] would relinquish any ownership rights. 


The final statement by the governments’ witness in the March 11, 2009 hearing contained a referral to livestock owners as [stakeholders]. This was no accidental use of the word. 


The US has historically produced the most disease free and well maintained herds in the world.  Because the USDA (nor the FDA) has moved to halt the importation of cattle from Mexico, known to be consistently suffering from bovine tuberculosis, the disease is constantly being introduced into the meat processing system and co-mingled with uncontaminated meat from US producers.  Wouldn’t the logical move here have been to halt imports of cattle from Mexico until they are able to eradicate bovine tuberculosis? Of course, this might cause some problems at that new “Mexican sovereign” terminal being constructed in Kansas City to by-pass our ports of entry and acceptance of in-bond shipments even of cattle. 


The unsanitary conditions at processing plants which have been well documented appear to escape the vision of USDA also.  These conditions are not related to herd or flock producers or the overall health of animals.  These conditions are the result of little to no inspections, or the lack of real interest on the part of inspectors, or the lack of an adequate number inspectors. This is also most especially the result of corporate processors more concerned with their profits than public food safety.


Why would an animal identification system or gps location of private property correct any of these problems which are not related to the actual health of animals?


NAIS has also seen the private ownership of livestock by private individuals referred to now as the [US National Herd].  There is no such herd.  But, NAIS would by the change in terminology, by the adherence to non-US laws, standards and regulations, create one.  This [US Herd] would be assembled by the NAIS and by Premises ID resulting from the forced compliance and forfeiture of private property rights mandated in these two programs and would quickly be handed over to corporate interests waiting behind the scenes for their plans and investments to pay off.


Designed by the National Institute of Animal Agriculture, NAIS is the constructed plan for seizing control of livestock production in the US.  Populated by meat processors such as Cargill and Tyson and bio-pirates such as Monsanto, the who’s who of this group also includes Digital Angel, AgInfoLink and Viatrace which are already stockpiling RFID chips, and tracking equipment, apparently having been assured this assault on private ownership and the ability to track it for the new owners was a ‘done deal”.


Judging from the stage show that was the March 11, 2009 Ag committee hearing, maybe it is.  What kind of fair hearing allows the paid proponents of NAIS and Premises ID to make grand opening statements containing gross errors in facts, allowing them to consume as much hearing time as they wanted, and limiting the opponents to five minutes or less? 


The obvious displeasure displayed committee members when facts were presented that refuted the governments position was noted by many of us who watched this contrived hearing. 


This was not a hearing in the true sense of the word.  This was the groundwork being laid for passing this assault on private property rights and anyone who watched it was supposed to come away thinking disease was running rampant in US privately owned herds as the result of too little government intrusion.  We didn’t get this impression at all. 


What we were impressed with was the efforts to implement another costly and inefficient not to mention unnecessary program at a time when the country’s indebtedness is skyrocketing.  We need to be cutting cost, cutting unnecessary and inefficient programs; not creating news programs which would exacerbate the debt.


It is unfortunate that at every turn we are faced with elected officials who cannot seem to find it in themselves to either adequately educate themselves about a subject or to act in defense of the public.  The idea that this “hearing” was even held is a signal that once again international agreements and corporate interests trump the public good. 


NAIS is not about disease control or track back.  It is the outright theft of private property to benefit corporate interests and to subject the American public to yet another round of foreign agreements.  It is another program that supposedly the FDA and USDA will administer not according to US laws and regulations, but rather to facilitate illegal trade agreements, standards and regulations which put the rights of investors and corporations above that of individuals or communities.


The data mined information on gps location and any other gathered information about livestock producers and farmers is being compiled on the Oracle database.  Although the Oracle server is located in Texas, the actual files collected have been moved to storage in Canada making them unavailable even under FOIA requests. 


It makes me sick to think that this is our government; this is our government working against us.


Marti Oakley


Preserving and canning “how-to’s”

Leave a comment

These are great ‘how-to’s” that are easily understandable, and easy to do.  A growing worldwide food shortage will hit here soon enough…take the time to learn how to preserve food now.  It may be all you have later.



Preserving Food: Drying Fruits And Vegetables – Nutrition

Complete Guide To Home Canning

Canning Meat, Wild Game, Poultry, & Fish Safely

Preparing And Canning Fermented Food And Pickled Vegetables

Every Step in Canning

Small-Scale Food Drying Technologies

Fighting gmo contamination around the world

1 Comment



Fighting GMO contamination around the world    pharm_crops_corn2


Ever since GMOs were first introduced in the mid-1990s, farmers’ groups and NGOs have warned that they would contaminate other crops. This has happened, just as predicted. In this article we look at how communities in different parts of the world that have experienced contamination are developing strategies to fight against it.

[Three videos accompany this article which can be viewed here: http://www.grain.org/videos/?id=195]

When GM crops are planted they contaminate other crops with transgenic material. In places where GM crops are grown on a large scale, it has already become almost impossible to find crops of the same species that are free of GM material. And the contamination spreads even to areas where GM crops are not officially permitted. [1] The GM Contamination Register, managed by GeneWatch UK and Greenpeace International, has documented more than 216 cases of GM contamination in 57 countries over the past 10 years, including 39 cases in 2007. [2]

Monsanto and the other biotech corporations have always known that their GM crops would contaminate other crops. Indeed, it was part of their strategy to force the world into accepting GMOs. But around the world people are refusing to lie down and accept genetic modification as a fact of life; instead they are struggling against it, even in places subject to contamination. In fact, some communities experiencing contamination are developing sophisticated forms of resistance to GM crops. These usually begin with short-term strategies to decontaminate their local seeds, but often seek over the long term to strengthen their traditional food and agricultural systems.

We look at the experiences of communities in different parts of the world in dealing with GM contamination to see what insights they can offer others faced with similar situations. Each situation is unique, and gives rise to different processes. Common to all of them is the primary importance of collective action – of communities working at the grassroots to identify their own solutions and not depending on courts or governments, which, without strong social pressure, tend to side with industry.
The experience of communities in Mexico

For the indigenous peoples of Mexico and Guatemala, maize is the basis of life. In the creation story of the Maya, maize was the only material into which the gods were able to breathe life, and they used it to make the flesh of the first four people on Earth. For other peoples of Mexico, maize is itself a goddess. The plant has been the fundamental food of Mexicans for centuries, and thousands of varieties provide an amazing range of nutrients, flavours, consistencies, recipes, and medicinal uses.
In January 2002, researchers at the University of California in Berkeley announced their discovery that local varieties of maize in the highlands of Oaxaca state had been contaminated. Other communities of small farmers carried out tests on their own crops and were shocked to find that they too had been contaminated. For these people, it was a deep blow to their culture. They could not sit back: something had to be done.

At first, though, they did not know what to do. GMOs were new to them. They started by bringing together the nearby communities that might also have suffered contamination, as well as NGOs that they were close to. Workshops were held and people were mandated by their local assemblies to discuss on behalf of their communities. The strategy was thus collective from the beginning. This is the first point to be noted about the Mexican experience.

One fundamental point of agreement reached early on was that this GM contamination needed to be viewed as part of a war. It was not an accident or an isolated issue, but part of a war against farmers and indigenous peoples – in their words, a war against the people of maize.


The new weapons of genetic engineering


This is an important article from GRAIN.  If you think biotechnology is the future…..it may be a future none of us wants.  Here again we see bio-priates at work attempting not only to patent their horrendous creations, but human life as well.

Marti             Tell a Friend 




The new weapons of genetic engineering


Over the last few years biotech laboratories and industry have developed two new techniques – artificial minichromosomes and transformed organelles – which, the industry claims, will allow it to overcome the problems it has faced until now with GMOs, especially their low efficiency and genetic contamination. But basic biology and maths indicate that, contrary to what the industry claims, the new technology will not prevent genetic contamination in plants. In fact, as the two technologies converge, the frightening possibility arises that contamination will reach a new level of toxicity, and occur not only within organisms of the same species but also between species as different from each other as plants and bacteria, or plants and fungi.

From its very beginning, genetic engineering has faced two tremendous barriers. First, there is the undeniable fact that the theory that each gene is responsible for a single characteristic (one gene–one trait), if it is true at all, holds true for only some genes. The more that is learnt about the functioning of cells and organisms, the more flexible and multiple the links between gene and function are found to be. [1] Second, there is the complex and powerful self-regulating capacity of chromosomes and genomes, which leads them to expel, delete or “silence” genetic material which is not part of their normal make-up. Mutations occur very often in nature, and most of the time the genetic material itself triggers mechanisms that “correct” or delete these mutations. The result is an amazing and stubborn stability of form and function. [2]

Three major practical effects derive from this: multiple and unexpected side-effects from genetic engineering; a very low rate of successful, stable expression of the engineered traits; and an overwhelming difficulty in genetically engineering traits that involve several genes. The biotech industry has addressed the first problem by not releasing engineered organisms with obviously harmful side-effects and by denying side-effects when they have occurred in the field or lab, or in animals and human beings. Industry has also been very careful to avoid acknowledging that fewer than one per cent of their attempts at genetic engineering are successful in any way. They are also reluctant to admit that none of the attractive initial promises of biotechnology – that it would make all plants capable of fixing nitrogen and acquiring phosphorus, that it would produce plants tolerant of drought, salt and heavy metals, and that it would manufacture new vaccines – has been delivered. A key factor in explaining this is that all these characteristics or products involve gene complexes; by contrast, almost all current biotech products are based upon single genes (plants that are tolerant of herbicide and plants that contain Bt toxin are two good examples).

As well as harming their public image, these failures have serious practical consequences for the companies, as they reduce their efficiency and limit their potential profits. Not surprisingly, the industry has long sought new approaches to overcome these limitations. Biotechnologists and the biotech industry are now saying that a major breakthrough has taken place: they are now able to build small artificial chromosomes that carry multiple genes and become fully functional once inserted into a cell. Due to their small size, these artificial chromosomes are called “minichromosomes”. It is claimed that they will make the engineering of complex traits possible and that they will dramatically reduce side-effects, as they will not disrupt the native genetic material of the engineered organisms. [3]    READ MORE

Sovereignty Hypocrisy – Part III


In part I of this series, I exposed the several phony declarations of “state sovereignty” currently being announced in the media, lately, by pointing out the fact that several of these same states have also been concurrently passing new laws that further violate the Second Amendment, under the pretense of lifting Second Amendment restrictions and “protecting” gun owners from gun confiscations during martial law.

In part II, I went a step farther and pointed out the fact that all of the states “declaring sovereignty” also happen to have FEMA camp locations within their boundaries and that some of them have also played host to martial law training drills for soldiers, police, firefighters and other “first responders” to “emergency” situations like biological and nuclear attacks.

In this part of the series, I shall point out that some of the same states are also either complying with the federal government’s illegal mandate for Real ID, or are currently making preparations to do so.

First, there is Nevada, which has has introduced legislation (SB52) that will bring Nevada into full compliance with Real ID standards. This bill has been introduced by the Nevada State Senate’s Finance Committee.

Then there is Arkansas, which has passed a similar bill (HB 1978), introduced in the Arkansas House of Representatives by Rep. John Edwards (D-Little Rock).

As for the state of Washington, also declaring its “sovereignty,” there seems to be some question as to whether or not its governor’s assurance it would not comply with Real ID are genuine, given the state’s previous apparent acceptance of Real ID.

The same sort of backsliding seems to be occurring in New Hampshire (the state whose motto is “Live free or die”), where there was first an “overwhelming” majority voting to reject Real ID, back in 2006, but in 2008, Governor John Lynch reportedly drafted a letter to ask Homeland Security to merely delay the enforcement of Real ID in New Hampshire. What a difference two years makes.

In Michigan, which also initially said it would reject Real ID, in 2007, the tune has also changed for the worse.

While Missouri has recently announced it will reject Real ID, after all, it had originally approved funding to put into place a “verification hub” to accommodate Real ID, in 2008. Can they be expected to reject Real ID, or will they flip-flop again and use those funds as planned earlier? Given that it is the Missouri Information Analysis Center (directed by the governor and the Missouri State Highway Patrol) that has recently released to police officers and highway patrolmen an “alert” branding all patriots – including supporters of third party candidates Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin and Bob Barr – as “militia members,” to be feared as enemies of law enforcement in Missouri, it seems probable.

Oklahoma – first to “declare sovereignty,” has also taken a less than certain stance on Real ID, first approving of it, then appearing to back away from that decision. But, as I pointed out in Part II, Okahoma has several FEMA detention centers, including the main federal inmate transfer center west of the Mississippi, right here in Oklahoma City. So, again, what are we to believe about the sincerity of Oklahoma legislators’ intentions?

California, another of the states alleging to declare its “sovereignty,” has apparently caved on Real ID, first passing a law complying with it in 2006, then passing an initiative that prepares for it in 2007.

Georgia, also pretending to declare state sovereignty, has never seemed to have a problem with the contradictory approval of Real ID for its unwitting citizens, even going so far as to deny its citizens access to the Hartsfield-Atlanta Airport if they did not comply.

Indiana, another state supposedly declaring its sovereignty from the federal government, was among the first states to eagerly adopt Real ID. So much for that “sovereignty.”

As of 2007, Kansas, yet another of the several states “declaring sovereignty,” said it had no problem with Real ID, either.

Alabama, another “early adopter” of Real ID, has since also appeared to (maybe) flip-flop on the issue, making the pretense, later, of rejecting it, but, being among those states that has FEMA detention facilities while “declaring its sovereignty,” what are we to believe is the truth?

Maine, after pretending to stand against Real ID, in 2007, has, as of 2008, caved in to it. Sovereignty? Yeah, right.

As for those “sovereignty movement” states that appear to be rejecting Real ID, as I pointed out in Parts I and II, there are other concerns which make it doubtful that they will, ultimately follow through with their rejection of Real ID.

As with the so-called “sovereignty movement,” the “rebellion” against Real ID appears to be all for show – a contrivance to lull Americans into a state of false security, believing their states will protect them from the fascist federal regime, while, at the same time, those same states are preparing for the implementation of martial law in America.

If you have any further doubts of this, look into each of the “sovereign” states’ recent legislative track records and ask yourself if the blizzard of laws they are all feverishly passing lately either rejects or supports the rise of a fascist police state. If you actually bother to read those laws, I think you will find more support for it than rejection.

Ultimately, when a government tells you it will voluntarily limit its own powers, you can be sure that’s a warning that the opposite is about to occur, for no government in history has ever willingly relinquished its power – and none, once they have it – ever will.

Promise for Change? Not for U.S. Livestock Producers When It Comes to NAIS

Leave a comment

R-CALF United Stockgrowers of America


Fighting for the U.S. Cattle Producer”


For Immediate Release                                                                               Contact: Shae Dodson, Communications Coordinator

March 12 2009                                                                                       Phone:  406-672-8969; e-mail: sdodson@r-calfusa.com


Washington, D.C. – “It’s business as usual in Washington, D.C., regarding how Congress and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) continue to ignore the interests of hard-working U.S. livestock producers,” said R-CALF USA President/Region VI Director Max Thornsberry, after testifying yesterday on USDA’s proposed National Animal Identification System (NAIS) before the U.S. House Agriculture Committee’s Subcommittee on Livestock, Dairy, and Poultry. 


“It is unbelievable, but true, that the new USDA was represented by the very people who already spent over $100 million in taxpayer dollars during the old Administration to coerce U.S. livestock producers into surrendering their private property rights just to appease the international World Trade Organization (WTO), which wants every U.S. farm and ranch and every U.S. farm animal to be registered in a federal database,” Thornsberry said.


Also yesterday, Congress passed the Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009, which awarded USDA an additional $14.5 million so it could continue its pursuit of NAIS.


Veterinarian John Clifford, who is the Deputy Administrator of Veterinary Services for USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), testified in support of NAIS on the grounds that, “Establishing an internationally recognized system of traceability will enhance the competitiveness of U.S. exports and animal products.” 


But Thornsberry testified that imposing costs on U.S. livestock producers and requiring them to surrender their personal and real property to a federal database in order to comply with international edicts is “a wholly inappropriate consideration for the exercise of APHIS’ authority pursuant to the Animal Health Protection Act of 2002…It is clear that USDA decided to conform to international standards and is now working backward to invent the need to impose this burdensome NAIS on U.S. livestock producers.”


Thornsberry said he was particularly disheartened by the fact that comments and questions made by members of Congress at the hearing demonstrated a belief that NAIS would miraculously address food safety problems.


“NAIS is not a food safety issue,” he emphasized. “If Congress wants to solve the food safety problems associated with the unprecedented recalls involving meat contaminated by pathogens such as E. coli, then it needs to trace these problems to their source: the unsanitary conditions at corporate meatpacking plants, which are not being properly policed by USDA. Holding livestock producers accountable for meat recalls caused by corporate meatpackers is, unfortunately, business as usual.”  


Thornsberry also criticized USDA’s continued use of what he called “fear tactics.” 


APHIS’ Clifford testified that if foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) were introduced into the U.S., the U.S. would not be able to get ahead of the disease without NAIS. 


“This is absurd,” said Thornsberry. “When a fast spreading disease like FMD is found, the way to control the disease is to immediately draw a geographical circle around the outbreak and restrict any livestock movement beyond the circle. You certainly don’t want to waste precious time trying to identify where every individual animal was born.”


Clifford also testified that the current U.S. animal disease system has not worked, and NAIS is now needed to protect the U.S. livestock industry from the spread of disease. Thornsberry countered that the current system has worked well to control and eradicate many serious diseases, including brucellosis and bovine tuberculosis (bovine TB). 


“If USDA would quit allowing Mexican cattle with bovine TB into the U.S., we could prevent the 75 percent of bovine TB detected in U.S. slaughtering plants that are known to originate in Mexico,” Thornsberry pointed out. 


“If Congress and USDA are serious about preventing the spread of animal diseases, they first need to strengthen our border controls to prevent the continued reintroduction of diseases into the United States,” he continued. “There is absolutely no need to require individual producers to register their livestock and their real estate in a federal registry.”


Thornsberry testified that Congress and USDA should immediately cease all efforts to implement NAIS and should, instead: 1) prevent the importation of serious cattle diseases and pests from foreign sources; 2) adopt the surveillance and identification components of the preexisting brucellosis program and require all breeding stock to be identified; 3) have States and Tribes maintain databases of breeding stock and allow local veterinarians to decide how best to identify the production unit where animals originate, without requiring federal registration of real property or livestock; 4) require the federal government to assist States and Tribes in maintaining their respective databases and in conducting more disease surveillance; and, 5) focus on eradicating diseases in wildlife populations.


“Rather than listen to the recommendations of actual livestock producers, Congress and USDA are listening to the eartag companies and meatpackers that stand to make millions of dollars, if not billions, off NAIS,” Thornsberry said.


“It truly is business as usual in D.C.,” he concluded.


Note: A copy of Thornsberry’s written and oral testimony is available under the “Animal Identification” link at             www.r-calfusa.com, or by contacting R-CALF USA Communications Coordinator Shae Dodson at the phone number or e-mail address listed above. Media who need a mug shot of Thornsberry also should contact Dodson.


                                                                                                             # # #


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


Note: To remove yourself from this list, reply to this e-mail and include the word “unsubscribe” in the subject line. 



Organic Consumers Association: What a difference a day makes


Imagine my surprise, after promoting this organization on my site, recommending it to so many others and believing this group would be instrumental in the fight against oppressive government regulations and unnecessary legislation that will cause undue hardship on organic farmers, ranchers and anyone devoted to natural food and traditional farming and ranching…..I find this alert from OCA calling the efforts to stop these egregious bills from being passed “internet myths”.  (See Alert below)



It is apparent NO ONE at OCA has actually read the bills or realizes that the “food Safety” bills are nothing less than pieces of an overall plan. 

This capitulation on the part of OCA occurred less than 24 hours after the Ag committee hearings that occurred yesterday regarding the intents of these bills. 

What a difference a day makes!

OCA also seems to be totally oblivious to the connections between Monsanto and current AG committee members, and individuals who cruise between government appointments and Monsanto on a regular basis along with individuals from other corporations which are just as malignant in their intent.

OCA might be interested in reading this list of who is who in the world of corporate pandering before calling any thing a “myth”. 

Its obvious the only myth any of us fighting this assault on agriculture and the right to farm and ranch without government intrusion is Organic Consumers Association, itself…….which has shown itself more than willing to support the marginalization and diminishment of grass roots efforts to fight back.   

Although OCA certainly has its shortcomings, we can’t count on them to support all the efforts by those of us dedicated to pushing back against government regulations and unnecessary legislation that would adversely affect all of us.

In actuality, OCA knows that HR 875 would cause great hardship to farmers and ranchers and should never support USDA’s new police state regulations and enforcement capabilities which would be granted if these horrible bills pass.

OCA also knows that HR 875 does not address global imports or contamination on any level and is targeted to US producers only.  OCA knows that HR 875 is far from limited in its vision of implementing a total capture of domestic food production and is not intended to make safe, or to protect the supply on any level.  It is simply a system designed to seize control of domestic production of any kind.

Its mythical to think OCA supports you!

As a result of the alert I received this morning, OCA will no longer be advertised or promoted on my site.  We will not recommend any article or information from them.

This alert from OCA makes clear their support is not with us or for us.

From OCA Alerts:

Internet Myth of the Week:

Congress To Pass Bill That Will Outlaw Organic Farming?

This week, we received numerous calls and emails from OCA supporters who came across alarming YouTube videos and emails circulating on the internet that claimed a new food safety bill (HR 875) introduced in Congress would make “organic farming illegal.” Although the Bill certainly has its shortcomings, it is an exaggeration to say that is a secret plot by Monsanto and the USDA to destroy the nation’s alternative food and farming system. In actuality, HR 875, the Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009, is a limited-vision attempt by moderate Democrats and Republicans to craft food safety legislation to address the out-of-control filth and contamination that are inherent in our industrialized, now globalized, “profit-at-any-cost” food system.

The idea that OCA would send out such an alert when so much is at stake is unforgivable. 

More on this later.





The Traitors Among Us



“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and he carries his banners openly. But the traitor moves among those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not traitor, he speaks in the accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their garments, and he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of a city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to be feared.” – Cicero, 42 B.C.

Checking into the considerable power and influence of Monsanto, I have uncovered the following list of representatives and senators who have been colluding with Monsanto and, thus, endangering our food supply – exactly the opposite of what these members of the House and Senate Agriculture Committees are supposed to be doing:

House Agriculture Committee members:

Brad Ellsworth, Indiana, who has accepted $2,000 in campaign contributions from Monsanto.

Jim Costa, California, who has accepted $500 in campaign contributions from Monsanto.

Leonard Boswell, Iowa, who has accepted $4,000 in campaign contributions from Monsanto.

Collin C. Peterson, Minnesota, the Chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, who has accepted $3,000 in campaign contributions from Monsanto.

Sam Graves, Missouri, who has accepted $5,000 in campaign contributions from Monsanto.

Steve King, Iowa, who has accepted $4,000 in campaign contributions from Monsanto.

Blaine Luetkemeyer, Missouri, who has accepted $1,000 in campaign contributions from Monsanto.

Adrian Smith, Nebraska, who has accepted $1,000 in campaign contributions from Monsanto.


Senate Agriculture committee members:

Tom Harkin, Iowa, Chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee, who has accepted $6,000 in campaign contributions from Monsanto.

Saxby Chambliss, Georgia, who has accepted $14,000 in campaign contributions from Monsanto.

Patrick Leahy, Vermont, who has accepted $1,000 in campaign contributions from Monsanto.

Max Baucus, Montana, who has accepted $5,000 in campaign contributions from Monsanto.

Mitch McConnell, Kentucky, who has accepted $5,000 in campaign contributions from Monsanto.

Blanche Lincoln, Arkansas, who has accepted $3,000 in campaign contributions from Monsanto.

Pat Roberts, Kansas, who has accepted $3,000 in campaign contributions from Monsanto.

Mike Johanns, Nebraska, who has accepted $2,000 in campaign contributions from Monsanto.

Ben Nelson, Nebraska, who has accepted $1,000 in campaign contributions from Monsanto.

Bob Casey, Pennsylvania, who has accepted $500 in campaign contributions from Monsanto.

Amy Klobuchar, Minnesota, who has accepted $1,000 in campaign contributions from Monsanto.

For the relatively small sum of $186,250 Monsanto has bought and paid for nineteen representatives and senators who are supposed to be serving their constituents, not the interests of Monsanto.

For decades, now, we have been allowing criminals to exist in our Congress – men and women who have, beyond accepting bribes on a routine basis, also come and gone through the revolving door that connects big business to government, holding board member positions in large multinational corporations like Monsanto, as well as many others. We have allowed them to come and go from business and industry and government as they please, completely oblivious to the fact that this is illegal and unethical, to say the least.

Among these “revolving door” politicos have been Mike Taylor, former Deputy Commissioner for Policy at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) from 1991-1994, who happens to have been an attorney working for Monsanto’s law firm for seven years prior to his FDA post – a post that was created for him, allegedly to steer the rapid approvals of drugs and food products, such as those made from Monsanto’s bio-engineered grain products.

Former Governor of Iowa Tom Vilsack, who was selected as Secretary of Agriculture in December 2008, is a supporter of genetically modified crops, including those designed to produce pharmaceuticals.

California state Senator Dean Florez is the author of California SB1056, which prevents local governments from legislating against genetically modified crops. This bill has been dubbed “The Monsanto Bill.”

Donald Rumsfeld, former Secretary of Defense under the Bush administration, was previously the CEO of G.D. Searle, a subsidiary of Monsanto.

Former U.S. Trade Ambassador Mickey Kantor was on the board of directors of Monsanto.

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas was a Monsanto attorney prior to his appointment to the court by George H.W. Bush.

Linda Fischer, who held a key post at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was head of Monsanto’s lobbying office in Washington, D.C.

Michael Friedman, former Acting Commissioner of the FDA, was later Senior Vice President for Clinical Affairs at G. D. Searle, subsidiary of Monsanto.

Marcia Hale, former Assistant to the President of the United States under Bill Clinton was later Director of International Government Affairs for Monsanto.

Josh King, former Director of Production for White House events, later served as Monsanto’s Director of Global Communications in Washington, D.C.

Margaret Miller, former Chemical Laboratory Supervisor at Monsanto, later became Deputy Director of Human Food Safety and Consultive Services of the New Animal Drug Evaluation Office, Center for Veterinary Medicine at the USDA.

William Ruckelshaus, former Chief Administrator of the EPA later served as a board member at Monsanto.

Needless to say, the interlocking web of money and deceit that ties our government to Monsanto and its interests is quite widespread.


Monsanto suing farmers

Leave a comment

According to a 2005 report issued by Center for Food Safety (CFS) Monsanto had filed 90 lawsuits against 147 farmers and 39 small businesses or farm related enterprises, using an annual budget of $10 million and a staff of 75 who are devoted to nothing other than investigating and prosecuting farmers. 


In 2007, CFS issued an updated report titled “Monsanto Vs. U.S. Farmers” which included this information:


Recorded Judgments (as of October 26, 2007):


     • Sums awarded to Monsanto in 57 recorded judgments against farmers totaled $21,583,431.99


     • The largest judgment was $3,052,800.00

     • The smallest judgment was $5,595.00

     • The average judgment was $385,418.42

     • The median judgment was $117,440.00.


CFS reports these statistics:


  • As of June 2006, Monsanto had instituted an estimated 2,391 to 4,531 “seed piracy matters” against farmers in 19 states

 Farmers have paid Monsanto an estimated $85,653,601 to $160,594,230  in settlements of these seed piracy matters


  • The number of seed piracy matters reported by Monsanto is 20 to 40 times the number of lawsuits we have found in public court records

 The estimated total of settlements paid to Monsanto by farmers ($85.7 to $160.6million) exceeds by four to eight times the total of recorded judgments ($21.6 million)


In what Monsanto refers to as [seed piracy matters], it is estimated the actual judgments against farmers is far higher than Monsanto would care to admit. 


Imagine.  A bio-piracy company making it’s living from altering natural seed and then patenting it claiming they “created” that seed, then accusing someone else of piracy. 

Monsanto surely does not limit its attempts to eradicate native crops to just the US.  In India, Monsanto tried patenting a strain of wheat known to produce high quality bread and baked goods.  Locating the gene sequences of the wheat, Monsanto then claimed they “invented’ the seed and filed a patent on what was a traditional crop.

Revoked in Total         from:  No Patents on Seeds

The opposition of Greenpeace was supported by one of the biggest farmers organizations in India. The Supreme Court in India also urged the revocation of the patent. After Greenpeace raised the patent, the European farmers organization COPA also filed opposition.

After Greenpeace challenged the patent in beginning 2004, the owner of the patent, US company Monsanto, sold it to a French seed company, R.A.G.T, in April 2004, together with other parts of the European wheat business. The company now stated in a letter that it “accepts that the patent be revoked.” In reaction to this letter the European Patent Office formally revoked the patent in total.

“Monsanto would like nothing more than to be the sole source for staple crop seeds in this country and around the world,” said Joseph Mendelson, CFS legal director. “And it will aggressively overturn centuries-old farming practices and drive its own clients out of business through lawsuits to achieve this goal.”

Monsanto, a corporation whose main business seems to be that of bio-piracy to the detriment of the world’s food supplies and populations seems not to have much regard for anything other than their bottom line.  In my opinion, the activity of Monsanto in its harassment and terrorizing of farmers, its attempts to seize food production around the world, is nothing less than bio-terrorism. 

 (C) 2009 Marti Oakley


Response to Brad Mitchell’s (Monsanto’s Director of Public Affairs) Defense of Company Policy


As usual Barb Peterson goes right to the heart of the issue!


Email This Post Email This Post

 This morning I opened my e-mail to find a request from an OpEdNews Editor to please respond to the following post submitted by Brad Mitchell, Monsanto’s Director of Public Affairs. What follows is his post, and my response.


Seed cleaners are used to clean seeds, nothing more. They remove the lighter material, and get rid of dirt and such. The fact that Monsanto even makes an issue of seed cleaning is proof of the company’s invasive tactics. In the clip below, how do you make the jump from the issue of seed cleaning to farmers moving away from saving seeds? And, if these seeds that Monsanto is producing cannot bear fruit in the second generation, what is the point in even saving them, and/or coming after those that do?


Recently there has been a minor buzz in the blogosphere about seed cleaners. The allegations are seed cleaners are being targeted by Monsanto, reportedly because we are trying to “remove access to normal, open pollinated seeds”-presumably so farmers will be forced to buy our patented, biotech seeds. As is often the situation, the truth is far less dramatic than fiction-and this is especially true in this case.


First, growers have been moving away from open-pollinated seeds to hybrids for decades. Hybrids often provide distinct advantages, most notably yield. But, you generally can’t save seed from most hybrids because the resulting offspring are genetically inconsistent, and will not offer the same benefits as the parent seed.


The issue of Monsanto not wanting to ”remove open pollinated/unpatented seeds from the market” is a moot point. With open-pollination, that cannot be controlled if crops are grown in the open and not in an enclosed space, contamination of surrounding crops by GMO will most definitely occur. The invasive species has the unlimited potential to take over and destroy heritage seeds on a global scale.


Monsanto’s assault on agriculture




Monsanto is a corporation reviled for its genetic tampering and attempts to seize control of agriculture around the world.  While trying to change its public persona into one of benevolence towards the public, the history of Monsanto is littered with continuous efforts to not only seize control of food production, but also supply.   Monsanto’s history also includes lives destroyed either financially and/or physically as the result of its activities.


Here in the US, Monsanto goon squads  routinely trespass onto privately owned land, take samples of privately owned crops and then claim Monsanto’s frankenseed crops are being grown illegally…their patents have been violated.  According to Monsanto, these are “unauthorized seeds”.  Those two words are a harbinger of things to come and should give you an idea where all of this is headed.


Courts have ruled that if Monsanto’s seeds sprout in a ditch near the uncontaminated natural crops of a farmer who refuses to grow gmo, the crop belongs to Monsanto along with fines and penalties. 


Monsanto attempts to minimize their harassment of non-participating farmers by saying that out of about 250,000 farmers they have only sued about 120.  Monsanto goes on to say that farmers will report other farmers who save seed, and that many of the tips they get about seed saving are from other farmers in the community.  I think the probability of this actually happening is slight and would tend to think more along the lines of the Goon Squads illegally trespassing and reporting; after all, that’s what they get paid for.


On top of this, Monsanto came up with a new in-house rule after the fact, claiming they had not sold the seeds to the farmers but had merely leased the seeds to the farmer.   This was a de facto legal maneuver.  After all, if you SELL something, how it is used is no longer your business, it doesn’t belong to you.  If you lease the same product, you now have continued interest in the use. 


Monsanto knows that genetic traits can be passed between grains or other plants either during handling and processing or as a result of pollination and that gmo transfers more readily than traditional seed.  As a result, they also know that genetic traits and makeup indicating the purity of any seed at this point in time is not achievable as a result of the contamination of traditional crops resulting from genetically altered crops being totally uncontrolled and uncontrollable.


Knowing that wind drift, bird droppings and other natural happenings would by necessity cause the contamination and cross pollination of natural crops with the genetically modified crops, Monsanto continued to push its malignant creations onto farmers who believed the hype that Monsanto’s “authorized seeds” would increase productivity and increase profits.  The passing of time and the analysis of these claims tells a different story.


In the case of soybeans:

Roundup Ready Soybeans Use 2-5 times more Herbicides than non-GE Varieties.  When you add royalties, fees and other costs the resulting profit for the farmer is $0.  The increase in production is negligible and usually less than a traditional crop.  These crops also require 2 to 3 times more water to grow.


Then there’s that problem with cotton:

(Excerpted from the original article at Global Research):  

The cotton’s agronomic performance is also erratic. When Monsanto’s GM cotton varieties were first introduced in the US, tens of thousands of acres suffered deformed roots and other unexpected problems. Monsanto paid out millions in settlements.

  • [4] When Bt cotton was tested in Indonesia, widespread pest infestation and drought damage forced withdrawal of the crop, despite the fact that Monsanto had been bribing at least 140 individuals for years, trying to gain approval.
  • [5] In India, inconsistent performance has resulted in more than $80 million dollars in losses in each of two states.
  • [6] Thousands of indebted Bt cotton farmers have committed suicide. In Vidarbha, in north east Maharashtra, from June through August 2006, farmers committed suicide at a rate of about one every eight hours.
  • [7] (The list of adverse reactions reported from other GM crops, in lab animals, livestock and humans, is considerably longer.) (end excerpt)

These are just two of the crops being devastated by genetic tampering and the attempts to lay claim to crops traditionally grown successfully without patents, tampering or alteration.


Wherever Monsanto has inserted itself in agriculture, food supplies dwindle, become unaffordable or have devastating affects on human health.  Traditional and proven seed stocks are destroyed or forever contaminated with genetically altered material that can include everything from human dna to that of numerous animals or many times unidentified genetic material.


And about that Artic Seed Vault…….as I asked before, if what Monsanto produces is so beneficial, if it in fact is far superior to traditional seeds…..why was none of their mutated stock included in the Vault? 

Maybe because it isn’t fit for human consumption?


 (C) 2009 Marti Oakley


House Committee on Agriculture~~Public Hearing…..minus the public of course!


 House Committee on Agriculture~~Public Hearing. 

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

Washington DC—at 10:00 AM the first public hearing was held on USDA’s proposed NAIS animal numbering and enforcement plan. Numerous organizations were frustrated that no public forum was provided in the last six years to approach elected officials concerning this polarizing strategy. Livestock producers all over the US were excited about this opportunity to present opposition to NAIS.  Recent polls have revealed that over 90% of livestock owners, if given a choice, would not enroll property in NAIS. 
For starters, USDA organized the format with eight approved speakers who were required to submit a written text prior to their presentation. 


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


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


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


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


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


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


Monsanto Whistleblower Says Genetically Engineered Crops May Cause Disease

Leave a comment


Global Research, November 19, 2006
The Institute for Responsible Technology (IRT) – 2006-08-10

Monsanto was quite happy to recruit young Kirk Azevedo to sell their geneticallywhistleblower engineered cotton. Kirk had grown up on a California farm and had worked in several jobs monitoring and testing pesticides and herbicides. Kirk was bright, ambitious, handsome and idealistic—the perfect candidate to project the company’s “Save the world through genetic engineering” image.

It was that image, in fact, that convinced Kirk to take the job in 1996. “When I was contacted by the headhunter from Monsanto, I began to study the company, namely the work of their CEO, Robert Shapiro.” Kirk was thoroughly impressed with Shapiro’s promise of a golden future through genetically modified (GM) crops. “He described how we would reduce the in-process waste from manufacturing, turn our fields into factories and produce anything from lifesaving drugs to insect-resistant plants. It was fascinating to me.” Kirk thought, “Here we go. I can do something to help the world and make it a better place.”

He left his job and accepted a position at Monsanto, rising quickly to become the facilitator for GM cotton sales in California and Arizona. He would often repeat Shapiro’s vision to customers, researchers, even fellow employees. After about three months, he visited Monsanto’s St. Louis headquarters for the first time for new employee training. There too, he took the opportunity to let his colleagues know how enthusiastic he was about Monsanto’s technology that was going to reduce waste, decrease poverty and help the world. Soon after the meeting, however, his world was shaken.

“A vice president pulled me aside,” recalled Kirk. “He told me something like, ‘Wait a second. What Robert Shapiro says is one thing. But what we do is something else. We are here to make money. He is the front man who tells a story. We don’t even understand what he is saying.’”

Kirk felt let down. “I went in there with the idea of helping and healing and came out with ‘Oh, I guess it is just another profit-oriented company.’” He returned to California, still holding out hopes that the new technology could make a difference.

Possible Toxins in GM Plants       READ MORE

Downsizer Dispatch: anti-NAIS campaign

Leave a comment

Quote of the Day: “Everything not specifically prohibited is mandatory.” — the fundamental principle of government

Subject: Our prediction comes true

The Congressional war against small business continues. The Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009 (H.R. 875) will create a new food safety bureaucracy, and require a “traceability” program for “food production facilities and food establishments.”

These new regulations will drive many small farms and restaurants out of business. Big Business can afford the compliance costs and will benefit from the reduced competition as smaller firms go bankrupt. Consumers will face fewer choices and higher prices, but will we really get safer food in return, and will it really be worth the cost?

Congress would have to know a lot of things that probably can’t be known in order to evaluate this question, but they’re charging ahead anyway, re-engineering society on the backs of small business owners.

Part of the bill’s intent is to absorb already-existing food-tracking programs. Section 210 (d)(4) says the new food-tracking system must be “consistent with existing statutes and regulations that require record-keeping or labeling for identifying the origin or history of food or food animals,” including “the National Animal Identification System (NAIS) as authorized by the Animal Health Protection Act of 2002 (AHPA).”

The contention that NAIS was authorized by the AHPA is wrong. NAIS implementation has never been authorized by any Congressional legislation. It’s a bureaucratic initiative.

This false assumption gives NAIS the aura of Congressional approval. Instead . . .

This is another step on the road to converting NAIS from a “voluntary” program to a mandatory one. This is exactly what we predicted three years ago when we launched our anti-NAIS campaign.

H.R. 875 is a de facto “authorization” of NAIS. It makes the penalties laid out in the AHPA applicable to participants of NAIS. It also presumes that NAIS can be “required,” or made mandatory for all owners of livestock and poultry — even exotic pets.

Up until now Congress has largely ignored NAIS, but Rep. David Obey, who introduced the Omnibus Appropriations Act, included $14.5 million for additional NAIS funding and has specifically expressed his intent that the money will be used to implement NAIS aggressively according to the USDA’s September 2008 Business Plan (written by bureaucrats as well).

This plan includes:

  • Forcing cattle owners to use NAIS “840” RFID (radio frequency identification) tags when they participate in vaccination programs
  • Increasing compliance in the sheep and goat industries through new regulations and “increased emphasis on enforcement.”
  • Requiring premise registration for horse owners who must submit their horses for EIA testing
  • 98% compliance by July 2009 for poultry and swine
  • 90% compliance by July 2009 for horses, sheep, and goats
  • 60% compliance by Oct 2010 for cattle

These figures reflect the USDA’s goal of near-total control of every aspect of the livestock industry.

Such control isn’t possible without aggressive, heavy-handed means. There’s already enough opposition to NAIS to make those targets impossible. That means farmers that don’t comply will be run out of business.

Many who do comply will lose their businesses because of the compliance cost. 

This issue is important right now because a hearing is scheduled on H.R. 875 on Wednesday, March 11. Please check the list in the P.S. to see if your Represenative serves on the committee, and if they do, please call them.

For the rest of you, we need to prepare the Congress to vote against H.R. 875 should it get out of committee. Use our simple Educate the Powerful System to . . .

  • Tell your Representative and Senators to strip NAIS from any pending legislation
  • Tell them to introduce legislation to abolish the program entirely

Thank you for being a part of the growing Downsize DC Army.

Jim Babka
DownsizeDC.org, Inc.

P.S. The subcommittee members are . . .

Joe Baca (D-CA), (p): 202-225-6161
Leonard Boswell (D-IA), (p): 202-225-3806
Dennis Cardoza (D-CA), (p): 202-225-6131
K. Michael Conaway (R-TX), (p): 202-225-3605
Jim Costa (D-CA), (p): 202-225-3341
Bob Goodlatte (R-VA), (p): 202-225-5431
Tim Holden (D-PA), (p): 202-225-5546
Steve Kagen (D-WI), (p): 202-225-5665
Steve King (R-IA), (p): 202-225-4426
Frank Kratovil, Jr. (D-MD), (p): 202-225-5311
Betsy Markey (D-CO), (p): 202-225-4676
Walt Minnick (D-ID), (p): 202-225-6611
Randy Neugebauer (Ranking Minority Member), (R-TX), (p): 202-225-4005
Mike Rogers (R-AL), (p):  202-225-3261
David P. Roe (R-TN), (p): 202-225-6356
David Scott (Subcommittee Chair), (D-GA), (p): 202-225-2939
Adrian Smith (R-NE), (p): 202-225-6435

Fight The Monsanto Monstrosity with Hydroponics

Leave a comment

While it is essential to our future food supply – and thus, our survival – to defeat the Monsanto juggernaut in our midst, I’d like to introduce a ray of hope that may contain at least a partial solution to safeguarding our food supply from unwanted infiltration by Monsanto’s “Roundup Ready” GMO seeds.

That solution comes in the form of an ancient farming technique known as hydroponics. While Nebuchadnezzar II built the hanging gardens of Babylon as early as 600 B.C., the science of hydroponic farming and gardening has, since the 1970s, become increasingly sophisticated and today, most of the world’s fruits and vegetables are grown in highly controlled hydroponic greenhouses.

Hydroponics is the practice of growing plants without soil by supplying them with all the necessary nutrients they require, directly at the root system, which is suspended in tanks of temperature-controlled water. This method of growing produce is actually superior in many ways to traditional soil-based farming, in that, it removes the possibility of soil-borne pests and diseases that can damage crops, it allows far greater yields because more can be grown in a smaller space than can be in a field, it is perfectly suited to organic gardening, it is better for food safety, and the resulting produce usually tastes better and is superior in nutritional value to its field-grown counterpart.

But, the main thing about hydroponic farming and gardening is that it can not only be carried out almost anywhere (including apartments, where small gardens can be grown indoors in very little floor space, supplementing one’s grocery shopping), but, since it is usually done in climate-controlled greenhouses, commercially, it avoids the possibility of contamination by wind-blown GMO seeds.

The big question, though, is will hydroponic gardens be outlawed? At present, there is a move on to do just that to regular soil-based home gardens, both here in America and in Europe, as well. Police helicopters equipped with thermal imaging equipment are increasingly being used to locate private homes and apartments in which people are using grow lights to nourish their hydroponic produce. Unfortunately, these grow lights are also used by marijuana growers, so the police are attempting to shut down hydroponic gardens by raiding and arresting hydroponic gardeners under the pretense of fighting the “drug war.” There are some tricks for avoiding this scenario, though. One of these is the use of LED grow lights, which have a lower temperature than conventional Metal Halide or halogen lights, as well as a longer life span (up to 18 hours a day for 7 ½ years) and lower operating costs.

Neverthless, hydroponics presents a way for many people to ensure their survival in the event of famine, whatever may cause it.

Some Hydroponics resources:

LED Grow Lights

How-to Info

Do-It-Yourself Info

To House Subcommittee on Livestock: from Darol Dickenson

Leave a comment

To House Subcommittee on Livestock:

At this time we are begging all elected leaders to help in the struggle of our life to keep federal government enforcements and regulations from destroying my grand children’s inheritance. The USDA’s panacea NAIS has grown from a bad idea to pandemic proportions, threatening the livelihood of every livestock producer in the USA. Here are some points for your consideration.

NAIS has been promoted by USDA employees as absolutely essential for US agriculture exports. Not true—the US has not produced enough beef to feed the nation in dozens of years. If not a pound of beef was exported, it would be fine to all livestock producers and no loss would be involved.

NAIS has been promoted for safe food. Not true—All the diseases USDA quotes as being horrible and dastardly is of no effect on healthy meat product. Cattle diseases of Scabies, Mad Cow, Hoof & Mouth, TB, Bangs, and Johne’s are safe for consumption. No USDA inspectors condemn meat with these diseases. These are mostly skin problems or do not effect meat for human food with proper processing.

NAIS is said to be free. Not true—Kansas State data proves that a herd of 50 cattle would cost $30 each for tags, computer equipment, readers, etc. The labor and cost per animal is more than the Cattle Fax data for the average profit for a market age steer calf. Financially it will take all the profit from the cow calf business for every commercial rancher. For smaller animals it will kill those people off even faster.

NAIS is said to be developed by veterinarians, educators and animal health people who know the needs of the nation. Not true—It was developed by European bureaucrats with intentions of destroying the livestock industry in the USA and the US negotiators are not experienced in agriculture well enough to know the difference. Not only that, USDA will not listen to farm and ranch do-it-in-the-dirt people who have valid experience.

NAIS is said to be a fast way for USDA to eliminate disease. Not true—the most expensive disease in the US is Johne’s disease that costs dairy people over $200 million annually. The USDA doesn’t want to eliminate disease or they would not have reduced research funding on Johne’s and would place a priority to develop a vaccine and one effective test to determine Johne’s disease. Horrible failure by USDA.

Please help US agriculture to survive bureaucratic flawed thought. It is life or death and we have some people in high paying jobs that are killing us and won’t even answer their phone when I call them. Any assistance you can provide is wonderful to end funding to NAIS–end all mandatory enforcements in all states and end all efforts to demand compliance in the USA.

Attached is an assorted group of articles with detailed info on opposing NAIS.

Thank you, Darol Dickinson, Barnesville, Ohio 43713, ph 740 758 5050.



Colin Peterson: Wants NAIS mandatory…

Leave a comment

These remarks from Colin Peterson (D) MN regarding NAIS should scare the hell out of all of us.  These comments come after Peterson himself acknowledged in 2007 that the greatst threat to the food supply was from imported foods…….only 1% of which are ever checked.  I have to wonder where the logic or rational is in failing to address this admitted flaw in imports, and the attempts to establish NAIS which no one wants, no one needs, and which is another of those useless government programs meant not to help, but rather to implement needless regulations. 

The USDA must be particularly happy with Peterson’s position…..it elevates them to the status of  a national police force dedicated to ending family farms and ranches.  Marti

Please note the last paragraphs of this report on remarks Chairman Peterson gave to the National Farmers Union convention.

Following remarks to the National Farmers Union (NFU) annual convention Monday, House Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson (D-MN) told reporters he plans to send a letter to over 400 ag groups this week requesting examples of farming practices that might qualify for payments under cap and trade legislation the panel plans to draft this spring. 


Farmers” do a lot of carbon sequestration already and there are probably other things they can be doing.”


Peterson said he believes legislation to limit greenhouse gas emissions will move through Congress this year, so “we need to get out ahead of this and define how agriculture can be a beneficiary of this and not just something that (lawmakers) are doing to do something to.” 


He indicated the Agriculture Committee would probably begin a series of hearings on climate change by mid-April.

House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) plans to release a draft global warming bill this month and wants a bill through his committee by Memorial Day. 


Much of Peterson’s address to NFU members focused on his committee’s passage last month of H.R. 977, the Derivatives Markets Transparency and Accountability Act of 2009. 


“We have put a pretty tough bill together,” he said, explaining  that the urgency to push the bill intensified with the credit crisis where the collapse of some of the nation’s largest financial institutions were linked to their involvement in the trading of unregulated credit derivatives like swap contracts. 


“This is bad…and it’s worse than a lot of people, I think, recognize,” according to Peterson, referring to the failure of some of the biggest banks on Wall Street.  “My expectation is the (Obama administration) is probably going to ask for another $1-2 trillion to bail out these banks.”


As a condition for using more of taxpayers’ money to keep the troubled banks in business, Peterson said he told Vice President Biden, White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel and Office and Management Budget director Peter Orzag last week that the Treasury Department should start breaking up the big banks.  “We should not have any institution in the United States that is too big to fail.”


Peterson went over the agriculture committee’s agenda for the rest of the year with USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack immediately prior to taking the stage at the NFU event.  In addition to overseeing USDA’s implementation of the remaining provisions of the 2008 Farm Bill, the Chairman said he wants to: modernize the Department of Agriculture’s computer system; reform federal crop insurance to address “in my opinion, the inordinate amount of power that the agents have and the actual imbalance of premiums that agents are getting in different parts of the country;” and make farmer participation in the National Animal Identification System (NAIS) mandatory. 


“This is not about us trying to put cost on you, this is about trying to protect” the livestock industry, said Peterson, a vocal critic of the Bush administration’s voluntary approach to NAIS. 


“We have spent more money on national animal ID than we would have to spend to do (a mandatory) program and to pay for the ear tags for every farmer.  We basically wasted the money,” he said.   


NAIS Tool Kit Index from www.naisSTINKS.com

Leave a comment

Below is the index for the NAIS Toolkit……….Get this kit……get informed and make a difference.  Use the link provided to access the entire PDF document.  It can be downloaded and printed off. 


http://www.naisstinks.com/flyers/Tool_Kit.pdf  (page 1 is blank)


The National Animal Identification System (NAIS) has deteriorated down to the most feared livestock enforcement tax program to ever be conceived in Washington. To assist livestock owners with information on self defense, the site www.naisSTINKS.comwas developed. Select articles from this site are correlated into an online printable form. These articles detail a few of the grossly negative, pernicious, profit destructive components, and deceptions of NAIS. It may be printed in file form for handouts. God’s speed as you join this most serous battle to accost our devious enemy, our very own government!


NAIS: The Basics Page 1 — The Basics of NAIS defined — by Judith McGeary – Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance


The Softening Page 2 — In preparation to peddle NAIS the nation must be scared with fear and trembling that there are diseases known and unknown that justify a multi billion dollar defensive. All livestock may die over night if USDA does not use NAIS as a tool. Wolf, Wolf, Wolf!


Western Horseman’s Poll on NAIS Page 3 — The only poll conducted to identify real opinions of livestock producers. Result 2.9% think NAIS is a great idea. Opposed was 93.3%. —A.J. Mangum


Dishonest Briefings Presented by USDA Page 4 — The US census data compares USDA Congressional briefings. False data by over 2,000,000.


NAIS: Not About Disease At All! Page 5 — USDA says NAIS is about disease trace back. False, it has nothing to do with serious diseases that face livestock.


NAIS: The Great Scam Page 7 — Details of what NAIS premises involves with land titles, World Bank and the International Monetary Fund —Derry Brownfield


NAIS: Cost of Compliance Page 10 — A 10 cow farm will cost $139 per animal for a first time entry cost. Each show, sale, pasture movement will cost additional. —Beef Stocker USA


Conversation with Darol Dickinson Page 11 — An interview published in Ohio’s Country Journal. A thumb nail Q & A on NAIS. Details of NAIS toxicity. —Ohio Country Journal


NAIS: Not About Safe Food Page 12 — The meat from nearly all diseased beef is safe to eat because these “feared” diseases are mostly skin related and not transferred to people. USDA inspection is the main problem with food safety. — Henry Lamb


NAIS: Not about Beef Export Page 13 — The US has imported an annual average of twice the amount of beef exported. For every million pounds of exported US beef, that same amount must be imported back to feed the nation. There is zero profit to the cattle producer to export a single pound of beef and no federal funds are needed to promote beef exports. It is all a wasted scam!!


NLIS: Disaster ID in Australia Page 15 — USDA would be wise to consider the flaws of the Australian ID system. It has failed completely with a running tab of $350 million, lost. Australian producers want to end the program which is a zero value fortheir beef export sales. —Australian Beef Association


NAIS: Farmers Treated Like Sex Offenders Page 16 — Should a child’s pony have the same federal surveillance as a convicted sex offender? —Henry Lamb


NAIS: Opting Out Page 17 — It may be easy to catch a bear, but near impossible to get loose from him—so is NAIS. Here is the escape form to help those who were deceived into surrendering and desperately want OUT! —Liberty Ark Coalition


NAIS: The Forth Component, Enforcement Page 19 — For every lowered speed limit on a down hill run, a radar trap is nearby. The terror of NAIS is fines, penalties, licenses fees, and prison time. Projected fines can cost the ranch.


NAIS: Why Become an Activist? Page 21 — Those who surrender lose all. To oppose NAIS is the farm, the estate, the plantation, the future of US food. Oppose NAIS with all your heart!!



Leave a comment

From: NAFAWNAIS Stinks Website
March 7, 2009
Contact: Darol Dickinson, 740 758 5050
Barnesville, Ohio USA



Email This Post Email This Post

The NAIS SURVIVAL TOOL KIT is on line, and immediately printable in full color. This information is easy to forward, assisting livestock producers world wide to defend their assets and family farms from invasive government enforcements. Michelle Reid sums it up, “We’re out here branding cattle, worrying about our best horse going blind, when all of a sudden the USDA is working at mach speed filling our saddle bags with heavy NAIS rocks.”

The NAIS SURVIVAL TOOL KIT contains quotes and information from trustworthy journalists, real cattle producers, reliable attorneys, and USDA employees. Research starts with the Basics by attorney Judith McGeary, then NAIS Western Horseman polling data, documentation of the USDA conspiracy to “sell” NAIS, and the deceptive international political entanglements. It documents cost analysis, flawed thought that was conceived either from a desire to destroy the livestock industry or just plain ignorance of food production, animal health and food safety. Producers are totally mystified why NAIS is promoted by USDA with proposed budgets up to $400,000,000 to “make every livestock producer comply.”

Print the KIT and be well informed. Inform everyone. Inform government employees who have never considered the pain and distress they will inflict on livestock owners if NAIS is fully enforced. Share the KIT with veterinarians and county extension agents. For printing go to www.naisSTINKS.com and touch NAIS TOOLKIT. Print PDF and select a 2-sided print text.

A valuable chapter is provided by the Australian Beef Association, chairman Brad Bellinger. It clearly documents the giant $350,000,000 cost of their ID system called NLIS. Five years ago producers were told NLIS would assist Australians in improved export sales, but now, fully operational, NLIS has ABA selling their beef for the second lowest prices of any major export beef country. All globally enforced ID schemes are proving to be profitable only to the governments, and ID equipment providers.

The 14 sheet (front and back) page KIT contains selected articles from http://www.naisSTINKS.com. Mark this site for 85 published articles equipping producers to protect themselves from a run-away government scheme. NAIS is not fully operational and can be truncated. Once a government enforcement program is fully active, the citizenry can never stop funding it. Use the KIT to protect yourself, your family and your grandchildren from NAIS enforcements, fines and Gestapo penalties. http://farmwars.info/

Older Entries

%d bloggers like this: