Family Farm Defenders is encouraging food sovereignty advocates to appear in court in Neillsville to express their solidarity with the Amish farmer being targeted by the State of Wisconsin in its first effort to enforce mandatory premises registration, stage one of the controversial National Animal Identification System (NAIS).
The Weston A Price Foundation point out that "Even now, NAIS is not a voluntary program. USDA is driving mandatory implementation by funding state NAIS programs with tens of millions of our tax dollars. Wisconsin and Indiana have already adopted regulations making premises registration mandatory. Other states are following their lead; Vermont has proposed regulations, while Pennsylvania is considering a statute. States all over the country are enrolling people in the premises registration program without those individuals' permission. And in contrast to USDA's assertion in this Guide that there are "no enforcement mechanisms or penalties," Wisconsin's regulations provide for revocation of licenses and penalties of up to $1,000 for failure to register, while the proposed Texas regulations included fines of up to $1,000 per day and even criminal penalties. To claim that NAIS is "voluntary" is contrary to the normal definition of this term. The USDA is redefining words in the tradition of George Orwell's 1984.
click here the request of DATCP - the Department of Agriculture, Trade & Consumer Protection - Clark County District Attorney, Darwin Zweig, filed a civil forfeiture complaint against Emmanuel on Oct. 2nd, 2008. If found guilty, Mr. Miller could be subject to a fine of up to $5000.
"This case being pursued against Mr. Miller would set a dangerous legal precedent and only serves to foster an atmosphere of hostility and discrimination against certain rural communities who should be welcomed as part of the future of sustainable agriculture in Wisconsin," noted John E. Peck, executive director of Family Farm Defenders. "While literally thousands of farmers have refused to comply with the state's mandatory premises registration for many valid reasons, it is painfully obvious that the state has chosen to go after Mr. Miller as a scapegoat in hopes of intimidating others into compliance."
Family Farm Defenders note that on Aug. 6th, 2008 Mr. Miller and another Amish elder traveled to Milwaukee to speak out against NAIS before the DATCP board meeting, gaining media attention and drawing the ire of government officials. Since 2003 Wisconsin has received millions in federal taxpayer dollars to aggressively implement statewide premises registration for all those who own livestock.
Those who have refused to "voluntarily" comply, including many Amish, have since:
1. received threatening government letters,
2. been denied milk licenses, and/or
3. found themselves registered against their will by the state.
Under NAIS, the next steps after premises registration will be mandatory RFID (radio frequency identification) chipping and government tracking of all livestock movements.
"Other concerns in Wisconsin ... is [sic] that the system is not maintained by state government, but instead relies upon the Wisconsin Livestock Identification Consortium (WLIC) to maintain the database of Premises ID registrants. This is currently continuing with the RFID tagging database as well http://www.wiid.org/index.php?action=anid_about. The WLIC is a private interest group made up of Big Agribusiness, including Cargill, Genetics/Biotech Corporations, like ABS Global, and RFID tagging companies such as Digital Angel, http://www.wiid.org/index.php?action=wlicnew_board and many of these members parallel NIAA membership http://animalagriculture.org/aboutNIAA/members/memberdirectory.asp. There are also in fact only 6 RFID tags that are approved by WLIC/NAIS at this time: 2 manufactured by Allflex, 2 by Digital Angel, one by Y-Tex and 1 by Global Animal Management. All four are WLIC members. http://www.wiid.org/index.php?action=anid_approved
click here includes Monsanto.
Family Farm Defenders will be watching this case closely and intends to work with legal counsel to appeal any court decision that would punish any livestock owner, Amish or otherwise, for exercising their religious freedom and food sovereignty in opposition to further implementation of NAIS in Wisconsin.
Derry Brownfield explains that "the World Bank, the International Monetary fund and how the world bankers planned on collateralizing the world debt with land. Not just the U.S. national debt, but also the "WORLD" debt.
That is, farmers in signing onto "premises ID" - and it is happening involuntarily to them across the country, appears to signing away his land as collateral on the bailout.
He bases this on a copy of a report of the FOURTH WORLD WILDERNESS CONGRESS, which was held in Denver in 1987. "Over 1500 people from sixty countries were told that wilderness lands were to protect the reindeer, the spotted owl and other endangered species. Ninety percent of the group consisted of conservationists, ecologists, government and United Nations bureaucrats. The other ten percent were world banking heavyweights, such as David Rockefeller of Chase Manhattan Bank, London banker Edmund de Rothschild and the Secretary of the U.S. Treasury, James Baker, who gave the keynote address."
George W. Hunt, an investment councilor, served as official host and sat in on all the meetings, and wrote the report.
Paraphrasing Mr. Brownfield: Conservationists were told the WILDERNESS CONGRESS was about beating the ozone deterioration and bringing the rain forests back. But in meetings closed to the public, with only bankers in attendance, the topics centered on a "WORLD CONSERVATION BANK" with collateral to be derived from receipt of wilderness properties throughout the world with central bank powers similar to the Federal Reserve and would create currency and loans and engage in international discounting, counter-trade, barter and swap actions. The bank would refinance by swapping debt for assets. A country with a huge national debt would receive money to pay off the debt by swapping the debt for wilderness lands. In the long term, when the countries won't be able to pay off the loans, governments from around the world will give title to their wilderness lands to the bankers.
Hunt said that World Bank loans, as they stand now, are not collateralized and they want collateral, so that when they loan-swap debt, they would own the Amazon when countries default. That is, they are going to make their bad loans good by collateralizing them after the fact with land and somebody is going to end up with title to twelve and half billion acres.
Brownfield says "The World Conservation Bank is a scheme to monetize land. This will function as a world central bank and out of that bank there will grow a one-world fiat currency.
"This isn't some scheme conjured up during the Bush and Clinton administrations. The United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development was created in 1982. The commission published the "BRUNDTLAND REPORT," setting the stage for unlimited enactments to take over ecology, and environmental and pollution laws throughout the world. The report stated: "We will have a proposal for very harsh, quasi-spiritual ecological laws for MOTHER EARTH. A MOTHER EARTH COMES FIRST mentality will arise throughout the world."
"When James Baker made his keynote speech in 1987, he stated that, "No longer will the World Bank carry this debt unsecured. The only assets we have to collateralize are federal lands and national parks." Baker's definition of federal lands includes Heritage sites, of which there are about 20 in the United States. I say "about" 20, because they are being added on a regular basis. As I write this article, Congress is about to vote on a proposed Rim of the Valley National Park that would include over 500,000 acres of National Forest land and 170,000 parcels of private property including many farms and ranches. At the same time there is a bill before Congress called the Northern Rockies Ecosystem Protection Act that would increase the acreage of designated wilderness by 50% in the lower 48 states. *** While our Heritage sites take in quite a large amount of territory, such as Yellowstone National Park and Mesa Verde, the Grand Canyon and the Everglades, other countries have much greater areas. Brazil for example has the Amazon Conservation Complex and Canada has the Canadian Rocky Mountain Parks. As I write this story, the list includes 851 properties in 141 countries, comprising over one third of the earth's land mass. Will all this land collateralize the world's debt? Probably not, so along comes NAIS (the National Animal Identification System).
"According to the United States Department of Agriculture, "The first step in implementing a national animal identification system (NAIS) is identifying and registering premises that are associated with the animal agriculture industry. In terms of the NAIS, a premise is any geographically unique location in which agricultural animals are raised, held, or boarded. Under this definition, farms, ranches, feed-yards, auction barns and livestock exhibitions and fair sites are all examples of premises."
"That may be the definition some government bureaucrat will give you, but the word "premises" under the "international Criminal Court Act 2002- Sect 4, states: The word "premises" includes a place and a "conveyance." Why check with the International Criminal Court Act? Because on June 8, 2007, Under-Secretary of Agriculture Bruce Knight, speaking at the World Pork Expo in Des Moines, Iowa, is quoted as saying, "We have to live by the same international rules we're expecting other people to do."
"Throughout the entire Draft National Animal Identification System Users Guide, land is referred to as a premises and not property. A "Premises" has no protection under the Constitution of the United States, while property always has the exclusive rights of the owner tied to it. The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution protect property rights.
"The word "Premise" is a synonym for the word tenement. A definition of the word tenement in law is: Property, such as land, held by one person "leasing" it to another. Webster's New World Dictionary 1960 College Edition defines "Premises" as the part of a deed or "lease" that states its reason, the parties involved and the property in "conveyance." Webster then defines "conveyance" as the transfer of ownership of real property from one person to another. It is quite obvious that the bureaucrats in Washington had a very good reason to use the term "premises" and never mention "PROPERTY."
"While the wilderness areas cover about one third of the earth's surface, they are wilderness areas for a good reason – they were useless or difficult to homestead, farm or use in a constructive manner. Worldwide, the best and more valuable land is occupied by farmers, ranchers and people with the ambition to produce. Wouldn't the World Bankers rather have some productive property besides mountains, deserts and swamps?"
Mr. Brownfield ends by saying "I am convinced that the word "premise" will put an encumbrance on your deed. The bankers say they want to monetize land. It's your land and my land they want to monetize."
- (i) $50,000 in the case of any individual, except that the civil penalty may not exceed $1000 in the case of an initial violation of this chapter by an individual moving regulated articles not for monetary gain;
(ii) $250,000 in the case of any other person for each violation; and
(iii) $500,000 for all violations adjudicated in a single proceeding.
STATE OF WISCONSIN
Plaintiff,
COMPLAINT FOR CIVIL FORFEITURE
vs.
Case No. 08-CX-05
EMANUEL MILLER, JR.
N9414 ROMDKA AVE.
LOYAL, WI 54446
Defendant
MOTION OF PAUL MARTIN GRIEPENTROG SUI JURIS
FOR LEAVE TO FILE BRIEF AMICUS CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT
Paul Martin Griepentrog, pro se sui juris, hereby requests leave to file a brief of amicus curiae in support of the defendant in this case. I am uniquely positioned to comment on the issue before this Court. As one who has studied the ramifications of “Premises Registration”, and who finds himself in the same situation as Emanuel J. Miller. See attached affidavit for details, (Verification of Administrative Admissions).
As indicated in the affidavit the named respondents failed to meet their fiduciary duty pursuant to 5 USC 556.
In Exhibit H. Dr. Paul McGraw indicates he believes that the Amish cannot meet step two because of their belief that, premises registration could lead to animal identification as there is no existing statute to affirm this contention. However the enclosed document NAIS Implementation Cooperative Agreement Work Plan for the WI DATCP, and the USDA/APHIS/ VS clearly indicates the plan includes individual animal identification. This document stands as a paid contract for the implementation of NAIS. See the USDA NAIS DRAFT, Strategic Plan 2005 to 2009 enclosed for full details of this program.
Whereas the State fails its prima facie case by not having established that a habendum clause is present on title deed to the property, which would determine or define the scope or existence of premises.
“Premises” in International law, includes a place and a conveyance. The mandate of conveyance under Premises Registration clearly violates Article 1, Section 14 of the Wisconsin Constitution which states all lands within the state are declared to be allodial, and feudal tenures are prohibited.
This information is given to the best of my belief and knowledge so help me YHVH , on this date December 14, 2008.
______________________________
Paul-Martin:Griepentrog pro se sui juris.