HSUS- Horribly Sadistic Urban Sociopaths

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

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

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

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

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

Highly Disturbing Video

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

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

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

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

Nano Nano— Na, No, Nada,

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

———-

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


Despite Denials, Nano-Food Is Here

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


The Ultimate Secret Ingredient

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

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

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

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

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


Industry Tactics Thwart Risk Awareness

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

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

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

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

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

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


Eating Nanomaterials Could Increase Underlying Risks

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


The FDA’s Blind Spot

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

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

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

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

Amid that uncertainty, calls for safety analysis are growing.

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

Will Consumers Swallow What Science Serves Up Next?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

2010 AOL Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Loving Care from Gov’t in Britain

Farmers face payment cuts over cattle ID rules

Sarah Trickett

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Until later……

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

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

Dana Tims
Seattle Times
Sun, 21 Feb 2010

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Source: The Oregonian

Truth Farmer with Joan Veon!!!

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

http://www.womensgroup.org/.

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

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

Thank you and God bless!

Doreen

Mind Control-We are being manipulated…Surprise!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Hearing on Use of NAIS Tags at Sale Barns

© Doreen Hannes

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Ahhh, the Census….

A Warning to Pastors – The 2010 Census

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Pastor Glenn Guest

For further reference:

Toolkit for Reaching the Faith-Based Community

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

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

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

Previous Older Entries Next Newer Entries