JEFFERSON\WAUKESHA WAPF CHAPTER

NAIS will put Livestock owners under closer surveillance than terrorists, illegals aliens, drug dealers, and convicted sex offenders/child molesters. Currently, only convicted sex offenders/child molesters have to register their premises.

Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008

We the people of Wisconsin, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, in order to secure its blessings, form a more perfect government, insure domestic tranquility and promote the general welfare, do establish this constitution. (Preamble Wisconsin Constitution).   "We the people." Have the right to compel government to act within constitutional limits. Our Wisconsin constitution does not star out "We the corporations"' or "We the special interests", or "I King George", or "The all powerful Ag Board", but "We the people".   Your oaths of office, sworn before Almighty God, the Creator of our unalienable rights, creates an obligation, by you, the public servants, to not be puppets for the Neo- Con agenda corporations.   By your actions you have already shown to us the people that you are willing to take money from special interests, and multi-national corporations, doing an end run around our sovereignty, having no regard what so ever for the Constitution or your oath of office.   Article IX Section 3 of the Wisconsin Constitution states, "The people of the state, in their right of sovereignty, are declared to possess the ultimate property." This means the people are the highest power; this means the words of the people are supreme; this means that the people possess absolute dominion and authority. Your jobs are an entitlement from "We the people".   It is time for you to stop acting like a fascist regime and tell the "military industrial complex" no NAIS in Wisconsin.Remember you took an oath of office that you swore to before Almighty God.   On page 391 of the 2005-2006 Wisconsin Blue book the division of animal health states; "Through the premises identification program, it registers persons who keep livestock and assigns an identification to each place at which livestock are kept..." "It registers persons, persons who keep livestock". Let me remind you of Article I Section 1 of the Wisconsin Constitution. It states "All people are born equally free and independent and have certain inherent rights; among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; to secure these rights governments are instituted, deriving their just powers from the governed."   By registering persons who keep livestock, farmers, the NAZI AUTHORITARIAN IDENTIFICATION SYSTEM grossly violates the supreme law of the land, Our Constitution.   The NAZI AUTHORITARIAN IDENTIFICATION SYSTEM also creates a new slavery- involuntary servitude- by requiring farmers to track and report to the AG REICH the movements of their livestock.   Farmers too have constitutional rights in Wisconsin. Article1 Section 2 of the Wisconsin Constitution states "There shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude in this state." Article XIII of the U.S. Constitution echoes the same sentiments as our Wisconsin Constitution.   This NAZI AUTHORITARIAN IDENTIFICATION SYSTEM was not put forward into Wisconsin by the people. It came here as a golden carrot dangling from the stick of an international, neo-con, corporate agenda. This proves to us, the people, beyond any reasonable doubt that the Ag Board has taken and put on the cloak of a tyrannical despot, creating a new world order of global enslavement.   We are going to beat this dictatorial agenda of corporate rule. These documents of the Republic protect our natural rights.   Unchecked power is the foundation of tyranny.   Checkmate.          

By Pat Shannan
Faced with stiff resistance from ranchers and
farmers, the Obama administration has decided
to scrap a national program that would
force all farms to register their livestock with
the federal government. After abandoning the controversial
plan, officials said they would rather start over
in trying to devise a livestock tracing program that
could win widespread support from the industry.
The National Animal Identification System
(NAIS), conceived in the contrived hysteria of the
mad cow disease scare in 2003, envisioned a central
database that would enable public officials to trace
any animal in the United States back to its farm of origin
within 48 hours. This, it was argued, would help
keep sick animals out of the food system; or, in the
case of a disease outbreak, impose quarantines.
The program had been pushed by large industrial
farms. However the American Farm Bureau Federation
is seeking to distance itself from the failed program.
The New York Times reports: “It was just overwhelming
in the country that people didn’t like it, and
I think [the Obama administration] took that feedback
to heart,” said Mary Kay Thatcher, public policy director
of the American Farm Bureau Federation.
The plan called for requiring anyone who keeps
livestock—from alpacas to cattle to even a chicken--
to register their farm or other property with a unique,
seven-digit “premises ID” by 2008. And the following
year, producers would have to go further, identifying
any animals that might ever leave the property. Many
livestock owners, especially small operators, were less
than happy about what the system meant for them.
“If what you raise is for export and you’re handling
hundreds of steers, then yes, it makes sense to go
ahead and register your animals,” one Hoosier argued.
“But now the government is saying that Aunt Martha’s
laying hen is a threat to the national food system.
Well, that’s just silly.”
The whole idea reeked of more unbearable government
controls, and farmers suspect that the replacement
plan will be but a subtle imitation of the first and
creep to greater controls.
Max Thornsberry, writing for the online pro-U.S.
farm news site, The Independent Cattleman, echoed
these concerns, adding:
While obtaining a premises ID number—the
first step to a nationwide NAIS—required no effort,
the second and third steps in the onerous WTOmandated
system would have been costly, difficult
and, I believe, would have generated rebellion on
the range. . . . Imagine having to get your cattle in a
chute, read the tags electronically, and report the
numbers to USDA every time you moved a set of
calves to another pasture, your dad’s place, or sent
a group of calves to the sale barn. Not only were
you going to be required to read the tags electronically,
but you were going to be required to report
the tag numbers to the appropriate authorities within
48 hours of that movement, or you would be out
of compliance and subject to enforcement fines: A
range rebellion in the making, and completely
unnecessary for a first world country like the U.S.
Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack announced at a
recent press conference:
“After concluding our listening tour on the
National Animal Identification System in 15 cities
across the country, receiving thousands of comments
from the public and input from states, tribal nations,
industry groups, and representatives for small and
organic farmers, it is apparent that a new strategy for
animal disease traceability is needed. I’ve decided to
revise the prior policy and offer a new approach to
animal disease traceability with changes that respond
directly to the feedback we heard.”
The framework, announced at the National Association
of State Departments of Agriculture (NASDA)
Mid-Year meeting, provides the basic tenets of an
improved animal disease traceability capability in the
United States. 
FEBRUARY 22, 2010 • ISSUE AFP ON BIG BROTHER 8 • AMERICAN FREE PRESS 3
Livestock ID Plan Butchered for Lack of Participation
Pat Shannan is a contributing editor for American Free
Press. He is also the author of several videos and books
including One in a Million: An IRS Travesty and I Rode With
Tupper, detailing Shannan’s experiences with Tupper Saussy
when the American dissident was on the run in the 1980s.
Both are available from AFP for $25 each.

By Paul Griepentrog
The Lost People: Part II
A way of life was put on trial in Neillsville, Wisconsin on September 23, 2oo9, in the case against Emanuel Miller Jr., having been charged under complaint for civil forfeiture because he refused to register his property under the state’s premise registration program. The morning session was devoted to the evidentiary hearing in which the state, represented by Clark Co. district attorney Darwin Zwieg and Bonnie Walksmuth, a court appointed attorney representing Emanuel Miller, presented evidence on behalf of the parties.
The afternoon session was devoted to the trial phase and concluded around 4 o’clock, at which time Judge Jon Counsell gave instructions that upon the completion of the trial transcript, there would be thirty days to file motions, fifteen days after to file rebuttals, oral arguments would occur seven days later, and then he would make his final decision.
Close to a hundred Amish were in attendance both from the local area and those who had come from other groups in a show of solidarity for Emanuel. There were three reporters and eight non-Amish present other than the witnesses for the state and defendant. Conspicuous by their absence were the representatives of the groups claiming to be fighting NAIS. The only group showing support was the Wisconsin Independent Consumers and Farmers Association (WICFA) by the presence of their president, C.J. Cordell and his wife Jessica.
The first phase of the hearing heard testimony from Emanuel Miller Jr., Emanuel Miller Sr., and Amos Schwartz, Deacon for the group in and around Taylor Co.; each giving testimony concerning their Biblical beliefs in that although they could not state with absolute certainty that the premises number was a precursor to the Mark of the Beast, they knew it was the first step in the NAIS protocol that would lead to the individual numbering and tracking of animals. They believed the need for caution in order to prevent them from being drawn into the NAIS program only to discover later that they had violated their beliefs and would then have no recourse to remedy their error. When asked what they would do if forced to register and be subject to fines, jail, or be forced to move they responded that they would accept or endure the consequences and stated: “If a faith is worth living for, it’s worth dying for.”
Upon questioning by D.A. Zwieg regarding the entry of information into databases as part of back tagging livestock to sell, fire numbers, and other aspects of daily life, the Amish gentlemen responded that these acts were done by others and outside their control or consent. Darwin Zwieg tried to separate Wisconsin’s premise identification program from NAIS despite the cooperative agreement held by the state and the USDA to implement the USDA’s business plan. Andrew Johnson a field representative for Dairy Farms of America a company, to which the Amish farmers sell milk, testified that as part of his field kit issued by the company contained a document from the state that the national trace back system would be made mandatory despite the state’s claims that individual tagging would be voluntary.
The afternoon’s session delved into the states witnesses, the three foremost individuals to offer testimony were: Duane Brandner compliance officer for animal health division, Dr. Paul McGraw head of the animal health division, and, Cheryl Daniels administrative attorney for the state department of agriculture.
It was during the testimony of these three individuals that Judge Counsell began to directly question the witnesses to further his understanding of the necessity of the premise number. It was during the questioning by Judge Counsell of these witnesses, that the responses to the questions posed became inconsistent with existing ag administrative code and the USDA’s business plan. There were several of these inconsistencies and I will deal with them in a later article after I have received the trial transcript.
However, there are two instances that stand out, the first being Dr. McGraw’s response to questions posed by Judge Counsell regarding the necessity of the premise registration system. Judge Counsell questioned whether the premise registration system had shown to be a benefit to disease control in Wisconsin to which Dr. McGraw responded “No”.
The judge then asked if had been shown to be a benefit in any other state it had been implemented and again the response was, “no”.
In the judges questioning of Cheryl Daniels the question was posed as whether the premise number was part of the 15 digit individual animal identifier number. A shocked look came onto Ms. Daniels face as she responded “no”; an answer in direct contradiction to the USDA’s business plan.
There was of course much more that occurred that day in court than what I could cover here, however, the conversation outside the courtroom during the breaks was just as insightful.
Having lived in an area with an Amish community I was surprised at their attitude, as it was one of cold anger, born of misinformation and broken promises from persons representing state and national groups that had lulled them into a false sense of security; a blight that exists throughout the anti NAIS movement today. My hope is that the people involved will come to the knowledge of the truth without having to face the stark reality of the courts and move to correct this unnecessary program.
Emanuel is not the only farmer facing prosecution for failing to register a premise; Pat Monchilovich is also scheduled for trial in October on the same charges.
You see, I also have a vested interest in these cases having received a visit from Duane Brandner in late February informing me I would be charged for failing to register.
Paul M. Griepentrog
(C) Copyright September, 2009. All rights reserved. This article may not be reprinted or redistributed either electronically or in hard copy, in whole or in part, in any form without the express permission of the author. For reprint permission contact skfarms@centurytel.net
Reprinted with permission.