USDA: Looks like the “Last Plantation” is about to get worse


new-logo251_002img_20160423_144516-2Marti Oakley




1779142_741581802541570_1637925020_nLiving in a rural agricultural community, I have witnessed first hand the devastation to the land and water from industrialized agriculture.  The other thing I have noticed over the years, is the dwindling numbers and kinds of wildlife, both large and small.  It is not uncommon to see major fish kills in rivers, lakes and streams, dead birds and small animals in large numbers around the fields of gmo crops.  The continual spraying of toxic chemicals to grow what is widely recognized as crops not fit for human consumption, is not to be stopped.

It only gets worse from here

Having done several Whistleblower’s episodes on my blogtalk channel “TS Radio”, the news that Sonny Perdue will most likely be the new Secretary of Agriculture does not come as good news.  Perdue, who is funded and backed by major bio-piracy companies most notably Monsanto, and others who are in the process of overtaking agriculture for profit, should come as no surprise. More

US code #7 Agriculture: Still not within the powers granted to the federal government


new-logo25Marti Oakley (c) copyright 2013 All Rights Reserved



The agricultural surveys are being sent out once again with a note on the front of the envelope stating “YOUR RESPONSE IS REQUIRED BY LAW”.  Actually not.  This statement is mis-leading, meant to intimidate and is completely false.  Title 7 Agriculture, is non-positive code & title.  This means the activities described and mandated under this code can only being cited as prima facie evidence, meaning homeland-poster-414421the wording can be cited as existing but cannot be used to bring criminal charges or used as the basis for declaring any right as illegal. It cannot be used or cited as an underlying authority for, as in this instance, declaring an unlawful survey  disguised as a “census” to be mandatory.   Prima facie is the assumption that something exist as other than what it actually is.  It takes little to determine that Title 7 is not lawful or constitutional.

The USDA nor any of the other alphabet agencies that exist as a result of non-positive code & title have no underlying authority except in the District of Criminals, insular possessions and territories occupied.  In the sovereign states, they have no force of law……..because they are NOT law.  These codes and titles exist as a wish list that has been foisted on the states with the help of your governors and state legislators who enabled them to contract with similar agencies in your state.  If you were not party to those contracts, (and you were not),if they were never revealed to you as existing (and they were not) and if you never signed your name agreeing to what is essentially the business plan of private corporations, you cannot be compelled to comply with the contract.  No state agency, regardless of whom it contracts with, can force those who were not party to the contract, to comply.

But don’t let this make you think a van load of jack-booted thugs from USDA won’t show up at your door, seize your assets and intimidate your family after unlawfully trespassing your property, most likely with the help of your local sheriff who is supposed to protect you from such incidences.  The law means absolutely nothing to these people.

Ultimately, Title 7 Agriculture, as with numerous other non-positive codes and titles, remains out of the lawful, constitutional reach of the federal corporation no matter how many egregious laws congress passes.  Agriculture is not in the powers enumerated for the federal government.


USDA Gearing Up to Conduct 2012 Census of Agriculture

National Agricultural Classification Survey is an Important Step toward a Complete Count
Washington, February 10, 2012 – Surveys are now arriving in mailboxes around the nation to help identify all active farms in the United States. The National Agricultural Classification Survey (NACS), which asks landowners whether or not they are farming and for basic farm information, is one of the most important early steps used to determine who should receive a 2012 Census of Agriculture report form. The Census of Agriculture, conducted every five years by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS), is a complete count of U.S. farms and ranches and the people who operate them.



We are asking everyone who receives the NACS to respond even if they are not farming so that we build the most accurate and comprehensive mailing list to account for all of U.S. agriculture in the Census,” said NASS’s Census and Survey Director, Renee Picanso. “The Census is the leading source of facts about American agriculture and the only source of agricultural statistics that is comparable for each county in the nation. Farm organizations, businesses, government decision-makers, commodity market analysts, news media, researchers and others use Census data to inform their work.”

NACS is required by law as part of the U.S. Census of Agriculture. By this same law, all information reported by individuals is kept confidential. NASS will mail the 2012 Census of Agriculture later this year and data will be collected into early 2013.

“The NACS survey is the first step in getting a complete count, so we ask everyone who receives a survey to complete and return it,” said Picanso. “The Census is a valuable way for producers and rural America to show their strength – in numbers.”

The 2012 Census of Agriculture is your voice, your future, your responsibility. For more information about NACS, the Census of Agriculture, or to add your name to the Census mail list, visit


NASS provides accurate, timely, useful and objective statistics in service to U.S. agriculture. We invite you to provide feedback on our products and services. Sign up at http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/subscriptions and look for “NASS Data User Community.”


This Census is a valuable way for the USDA to manipulate markets, to map out who and where food is being produced that might interfere with global producers, say for instance, Monsanto.

The Census is a valuable way for producers and rural America to show their strength – in numbers.”  The first question here would have to be, “In what possible way?”  It is the numbers they are after.  Just how big is the remaining, dwindling independent and family ranching and farming community and what is it likely to take to put them out of business? More

White House Gives Go-ahead For Elitists to Control DNA


Michael Edwards
Activist Post
It is official: in the name of “clean energy, pollution control and medicine,” the White House is prepared to let scientists, spearheaded by the J. Craig Venter Institute, “manipulate DNA of organisms to forge new life forms,” according to a recent AFP article.

The Orwellian language used by Barack Obama’s Presidential Commission For The Study of Bioethical Issues is a study in wordiness, misdirection, and obfuscation that is typical when trying to cover up the true intent.  For example, on one hand the Commission acknowledges that the J. Craig Venter Institute has found the ability to forge new life forms, but also states that Venter’s team didn’t create life, since the work primarily involved altering an already existing life form. More

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


%d bloggers like this: