Hello, Hello- Anybody Home???????????????

[Anonymous]

3/29/2006 10:03:00 AM


Jolley: Weird Science



It should be the title of our effort to get American beef back on the Japanese dinner table. It's also the title of a movie that gave Anthony Michael Hall his 15 minutes of fame in 1985.



Mr. Hall played a hopeless and dateless high school nerd who solved his social relationship problem with some weird science. Along with his best bud Ian, he created Lisa, a drop dead gorgeous artificial humanoid played by Kelly LeBrock. She was, of course, a fantasy creature destined to disappear at the end of the movie.



In one scene, Ian's brother, Chet, a gung ho, Marine-type, no-nonsense jerk played by Bill Paxton at his scenery chewing best, tries to bring his little brother back to reality by knocking on his forehead and yelling "Hello, hello, anybody home?



Of course, no one was at home and 'hilarity ensues' as they say in the movie and television review business.



So call me Chet already but somebody needs to knock on the USDA's front door --- or maybe some high-placed USDA official's forehead --- and ask rudely if anybody is home.



Yesterday, the Associated Press' Libby Quaid wrote a story headlined, "U.S. Wants Japan to Resume Beef Shipments." Yeah, no kidding? She said Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns "wants to persuade Japan to resume U.S. beef shipments before deciding whether to scale back tests for mad cow disease."



"Hello, hello, anybody home?"



The Japanese, already really leery of our ability to manage our meat business after the Atlantic Veal fiasco, are suggesting that testing every animal that's harvested with the intent of sending to meat to Tokyo might be a good idea. In the polite world of Japanese negotiation, a statement like that is really a non-negotiable demand. As Larry the Cable Guy says, "Get 'er done." Or get out of town.



Talking about their long-announced plan to reduce testing, Johann said during a Monday interview, "We just haven't been in a hurry. We would like to see if we can get things straightened out with Japan and some of our other trading partners."



And then drop back – way back – on testing?



What he just told the Japanese is "We want your business but as soon as you agree to reopen your markets to American beef, we might want to change our minds about our BSE testing requirements. Trust us. We wouldn't lie to you."



It's not like American beef producers who want to compete with a growing and aggressive Australian presence in Japan can go ahead and test on their own. The USDA closed that door when they told Creekstone two years ago that a company can't make a market-driven business decision to test, claiming it isn't "legal." Only the feds can do it.



Two days of talks are set to begin today in Tokyo between a U.S. Department of Agriculture team led by Chuck Lambert, under secretary for marketing and regulatory programs and Japanese foreign affairs, health and agriculture ministry officials. The Japanese market is worth millions to U.S. beef producers but Johanns' comments will make those talks problematic and hog tie Lambert's effort at reaching an accord this year.



Creekstone's recent suit to force the USDA to allow blanket testing just gained greater importance. It's no longer one small packer's effort to comply with a single trading partner's request; it's an effort to allow free market forces, not outmoded government policies, to shape our working relationships with major trading partners around the world.

 

[Sandhusker]

Helllooo is right. How long are we going to let the USDA stumble bumble along? How much money do we need to leave on the table? How entrenched in the Japanese markets do we want our comptition to get?

 

[DiamondSCattleCo]

Helllooo is right. How long are we going to let the USDA stumble bumble along? How much money do we need to leave on the table? How entrenched in the Japanese markets do we want our comptition to get?

You certainly don't have much to worry about from the Canadian side, 'Husker as the brilliant tacticians in charge of our marketing strategies are echoing the USDA.

Rod

 

[Sandhusker]

Helllooo is right. How long are we going to let the USDA stumble bumble along? How much money do we need to leave on the table? How entrenched in the Japanese markets do we want our comptition to get?

You certainly don't have much to worry about from the Canadian side, 'Husker as the brilliant tacticians in charge of our marketing strategies are echoing the USDA.

Rod

What was the statement up there, "We don't want to make the USDA mad"? Considering the current "relationship" that can certainly be taken as, "We don't want to make the AMI mad".

I hope we can get Harkin/Enzi passed. We need it badly.

 

[Anonymous]

USDA inc. may be just helping out the "boys" to make sure they get a return on their investments :???: Heres an example of one:

---------------------------------------

Cargill Beef Australia opens new $36 million Wagga Wagga processing plant
CARGILL Beef Australia began operating its new $36 million Wagga Wagga processing plant at Bomen on October 6, 2005. The expansion will increase the daily processing capacity to 1,200 cattle from 850-900 and employment will grow to 625 from 500. "The increased capacity will be distributed to our dedicated customers in key export markets and here in Australia," said Dick Kelley, general manager of Cargill Beef Australia.

"One of the key factors that made this upgrade possible has been the commitment from our employees in Wagga Wagga," Mr Kelley said. "The commitment from our employees has created the flexibility to meet and exceed our customers' requirements and provide an environment where we can be competitive in the beef processing sector. "Significant benefits that have been realised through our employees have been the improvement in productivity and safety." New efficiencies in product flow, installation of plate freezers, carton blast chillers and Video Image Analysis equipment are just a few of the technologies and quality management process improvements incorporated in the upgrade. The new plant will also introduce the table-method of boning which will result in greatly improved ergonomics for employees.

Mr Kelley said the upgrade included a new meat-boning room, carcase sortation coolers, boxed-beef handling, chilling and freezing systems, as well as new environmental management systems. Also installed was a biofilter designed to filter air coming from the plant. Capital was also dedicated to new wastewater pre-treatment equipment.
Mr Kelley said local tradespeople have been used during much of the construction phase which started 12 months ago.

Cargill acquired the processing facility in Wagga Wagga in 1991. Cargill Beef Australia also operates a beef facility in Tamworth, which opened in 1998.

 

[Sandhusker]

USDA inc. may be just helping out the "boys" to make sure they get a return on their investments :???: Heres an example of one:

---------------------------------------

Cargill Beef Australia opens new $36 million Wagga Wagga processing plant
CARGILL Beef Australia began operating its new $36 million Wagga Wagga processing plant at Bomen on October 6, 2005. The expansion will increase the daily processing capacity to 1,200 cattle from 850-900 and employment will grow to 625 from 500. "The increased capacity will be distributed to our dedicated customers in key export markets and here in Australia," said Dick Kelley, general manager of Cargill Beef Australia.

"One of the key factors that made this upgrade possible has been the commitment from our employees in Wagga Wagga," Mr Kelley said. "The commitment from our employees has created the flexibility to meet and exceed our customers' requirements and provide an environment where we can be competitive in the beef processing sector. "Significant benefits that have been realised through our employees have been the improvement in productivity and safety." New efficiencies in product flow, installation of plate freezers, carton blast chillers and Video Image Analysis equipment are just a few of the technologies and quality management process improvements incorporated in the upgrade. The new plant will also introduce the table-method of boning which will result in greatly improved ergonomics for employees.

Mr Kelley said the upgrade included a new meat-boning room, carcase sortation coolers, boxed-beef handling, chilling and freezing systems, as well as new environmental management systems. Also installed was a biofilter designed to filter air coming from the plant. Capital was also dedicated to new wastewater pre-treatment equipment.
Mr Kelley said local tradespeople have been used during much of the construction phase which started 12 months ago.

Cargill acquired the processing facility in Wagga Wagga in 1991. Cargill Beef Australia also operates a beef facility in Tamworth, which opened in 1998.

The US is officially out of the Japanese market, but Cargill has two routes into Japan; Austrailia and Canada. Ain't that something? Do you think those facts might influence what they ask the USDA to do?

 

[Econ101]

This isn't the first time the U.S. has used its influence and money incompetently and tried to sweep it under the rug. Here is how they sold out the stated interests of the U.S. in regards to Iraq via Australia. We really have a bunch of clowns running our govt. with no congressional oversight.



The Hawk Eye
Subscribe Today | Search the Archive
Sunday, February 26, 2006
Site updated daily at 11 a.m. CST
HOME · NEWS · SPORTS · OBITUARIES · CLASSIFIEDS · MARKETPLACE · FEATURES · PHOTOS · CONTACT US · SUBSCRIBE

Where's the accountability?

Alan Guebert Alan Guebert

Amonth ago, this space outlined the ongoing Australian probe of AWB, that nation's single–desk wheat exporter, and the nearly $215 million in kickbacks and bribes it paid to Iraqi officials to keep Aussie wheat flowing into Iraq between 1999 and the U.S.–led takeover in spring 2003.

The column also noted that U.S. wheat growers had asked Secretary of Agriculture Mike Johanns to cut off (officially, "debar") AWB's American affiliate, AWB USA, from U.S. Department of Agriculture credit programs since the investigation had revealed clear evidence — memos, sales documents, bank statements — that AWB management was up to its eyeballs in Iraqi corruption and graft.

Well, the probe continues, as does the wait by U.S. growers for Johanns to boot AWB USA from the USDA credit trough.

On the Australian front, mounting evidence has established hard links between AWB's Iraq game and Prime Minister John Howard's government. It is now nearly indisputable that top Australian officials not only were aware of AWB's kickbacks in Iraq, they endorsed them.

For its part, AWB has seen enough. On Feb. 9, it announced the resignation of Andrew Lindberg, the monopoly exporter's managing director.

Lindberg had to go. In several days of testimony early in the investigation, he sounded like a bumbling idiot while dodging tough, direct questions. The best reply he could make to more than 40 of 'em was a weak "I don't know."

In one "particularly heated exchange," noted the Aussie press, frustrated investigators finally just "asked Mr. Lindberg if he was 'a complete fool' — to which Mr. Lindberg said he was not."

OK, not a complete fool, but now a gainfully unemployed one.

The U.S. side of the crooked mess remains in limbo. Calls by wheat growers and several U.S. senators to debar AWB USA from USDA credit programs were conditionally dismissed by Secretary Johanns Feb. 10 in a letter to Sen. Tom Harkin, D–Iowa.

"If confirmed," Johanns wrote Harkin, "the (AWB bribery) allegations ... could certainly affect AWB USA's participation in USDA export programs." Until then, however, Johanns politely suggested that Harkin and his fellow senators just buzz off.

What the Johanns' letter did not note — and what several Washington insiders already know — is that from fiscal year 2002 through 2004, AWB USA received about $170 million of USDA supplier credit to purchase and resell nearly $260 million of U.S. wheat, soybeans and corn to U.S. customers overseas.

According to those insiders, AWB USA's bite of that American apple amounted to about 10 percent of all supplier credit provided under the USDA export program for those years. Since then, according to Johanns, AWB USA "has not participated in USDA export credit guarantee programs."

Knowledgeable trade watchers in the U.S. and Australia suggest that Johanns is now playing the Lindberg role of knave. They want to know exactly what AWB USA did with the cash and where the grain AWB USA bought with it went.

The implication — given AWB's now firmly established, loose business practices — is that AWB USA used American export credit programs to sell American grain to nations where U.S. firms were barred because of known corruption. If so, AWB USA and its owner, AWB, broke U.S. anti–corruption laws.

Moreover, rumors continue to circulate that AWB received $600,000 from the American–led Coalition Provisional Authority in post–Saddam Baghdad to cover some of the bribes it paid the former dictator's cronies for wheat contracts still in force at the time.

Stir into that mix the meltdown U.S. Sen. Norm Coleman, R–Minn., experienced in late January when news from Australia confirmed he had been bamboozled in October 2004 by Michael Thawley, then the Australian ambassador to the U.S, when Thawley assured him there was no truth to the rumors AWB paid bribes to Hussein.

On Jan. 31, the scorned Coleman fired off incendiary letters to Johanns, Thawley and Dennis Richardson, the current Australian ambassador to the U.S., over what he called the "avalanche of evidence" now highlighting AWB kickbacks and the USDA's failure to respond.

Given the avalanche already, why doesn't Johanns debar AWB USA from USDA credit?

Senators and farmers need to continue asking.

Columnist Alan Guebert, Delavan, Ill., has covered food production and ag policy for more than 20 years.
The Hawk Eye
800 S. Main St., Burlington, Iowa 52601
319-754-8461 · 1-800-397-1708 · FAX 319-754-6824 · [email protected]

 

[DiamondSCattleCo]

Cargill acquired the processing facility in Wagga Wagga in 1991. Cargill Beef Australia also operates a beef facility in Tamworth, which opened in 1998.

Lovely, so not only are they using the beef profits for expansion and to float their other interests in competing meats, they're using those profits to buy into competing COUNTRIES!

Rod

 

[Sandhusker]

Cargill acquired the processing facility in Wagga Wagga in 1991. Cargill Beef Australia also operates a beef facility in Tamworth, which opened in 1998.

Lovely, so not only are they using the beef profits for expansion and to float their other interests in competing meats, they're using those profits to buy into competing COUNTRIES!

Rod

But, but, I was told on this very site that the more the packers made, the more they could pay us. You mean to tell me that they aren't tithing profits back to US producers? How can they expand in other countries if they only make $5 something a head? :roll: :lol: :lol: :wink:

 

[ranch hand]

Cargill acquired the processing facility in Wagga Wagga in 1991. Cargill Beef Australia also operates a beef facility in Tamworth, which opened in 1998.

Lovely, so not only are they using the beef profits for expansion and to float their other interests in competing meats, they're using those profits to buy into competing COUNTRIES!

Rod

But, but, I was told on this very site that the more the packers made, the more they could pay us. You mean to tell me that they aren't tithing profits back to US producers? How can they expand in other countries if they only make $5 something a head? :roll: :lol: :lol: :wink:

:lol: :shock: :? :???:

 

[Econ101]

Cargill acquired the processing facility in Wagga Wagga in 1991. Cargill Beef Australia also operates a beef facility in Tamworth, which opened in 1998.

Lovely, so not only are they using the beef profits for expansion and to float their other interests in competing meats, they're using those profits to buy into competing COUNTRIES!

Rod

But, but, I was told on this very site that the more the packers made, the more they could pay us. You mean to tell me that they aren't tithing profits back to US producers? How can they expand in other countries if they only make $5 something a head? :roll: :lol: :lol: :wink:

That was either Arthur Anderson's accountants that got let go after Enron or the Alberta govt.'s numbers. Besides, it is a APDACM number- (After Political Donations and Corruption Money) :wink:

 

[RobertMac]

This is what a global economy is all about...there is no USA or Canadian or Australian beef...it's all Cargill beef. :? :x

 

[T3023]

Difficult and tough!

Stop competeing with world market. Go to the "Gold" standard. Remove the possibility of disease and contamination. Bring all the troops home. Barter and wait for them to come to us.

:lol: :wink:

 

[Sandhusker]

This is what a global economy is all about...there is no USA or Canadian or Australian beef...it's all Cargill beef. :? :x

You hit the nail on the head, RM. We're getting a taste of what is to come if we don't change. How do you like it, fellas? Want more of this? How does the US producer fit in this deal? Is that where you want to be?

This is exactly why the big multinationals are fighting COOL and pushing for more open borders - and they're getting their way because too many producers are either sitting on their hands or following a cattleman's orginization that is promoting the same thing.

 

[feeder]

Cattle producers can try to fight by contacting the powers in Washington but they don't seem to listen. Look at the immigration debate. When 75-80 % of the American public want stricter regs. Washington isn't listening. That is what happens when corruption rules. All we can do is to keep trying. Good luck to all that live by morals and values.

 

[mrj]

Cargill acquired the processing facility in Wagga Wagga in 1991. Cargill Beef Australia also operates a beef facility in Tamworth, which opened in 1998.

Lovely, so not only are they using the beef profits for expansion and to float their other interests in competing meats, they're using those profits to buy into competing COUNTRIES!

Rod

But, but, I was told on this very site that the more the packers made, the more they could pay us. You mean to tell me that they aren't tithing profits back to US producers? How can they expand in other countries if they only make $5 something a head? :roll: :lol: :lol: :wink:

I probably could concede that the fact Packers make more money on the beef they process does not guarantee that they WILL pay more for cattle, only that they CAN pay more if they NEED to do so in order to secure the supplies they need. BTW, do see the difference between saying that Packers WILL pay more when they make more, or was it that they COULD pay more? Supply and demand will have most influence on cattle prices, IMO, but profitability of the Packing industry surely is a factor, too.

Now, will you admit that Packers CANNOT pay more for cattle if they are consistently losing money with no forseeable hope of changing that loss?

feeder, is it possible that there are things those of us out in the country, and all citizens of this country may not know, and that they leaders at the top DO know about this situation, and which may not be due to corruption, that determines the decision on the borders? What if there was NO ONE to pick the crops requiring hand picking in the fruit and veg industries....tomorrow????

How much will prices for fresh veggies and fruits go up if the growers have to pay US citizens whatever they demand in order to get that food to market?

How much will beef prices have to go up if all illegal immigrants were gone tomorrow?

I do not like this system, and believe it must be fixed immediately, however I also recognize that chaos is not pretty! The cure and repair of our border problems and illegal workers has to be done in an order, and systematically in order to prevent real chaotic disruptions of our food production, processing, and distributions systems, first, because they are the most vulnerable and would put the people in this country at risk if they were to break down abruptly with no plan in place to keep food moving to consumers. Or am I the only one who sees it this way?

MRJ

MRJ

 

[feeder]

MRJ, Yes there is a place and time for seasonal workers. But it has gotten out of hand. They are now taking jobs away from citizens that are willing to do the work for a fair price. Isn't that what our government wants to lower the cost of production in the USA to compete on the global scale. That will in time lower our standard of living. It is like the joke I read, where the illegals tell their family and friends to come to America. Here they pay for your medical, food, lodging and you don't have to even work if you don't want to. It is starting to weigh heavily on our national treasury. IMO. I could tolerate people coming to America better if they would learn our language and abide by our laws. Here there is total disregard for our laws by illegals. That might be different in other states, I don't know.

 

[T3023]

The money backers who are the corporate industry are taking over. The country is "Really" 81 trillion in debt; 9 billion is just the interest. We are paying the debts by selling off US territories. China now holds long beach navel ship yard. The deepest water port in the Caribbean and the Panama Canal. FTAA plans to build a highway from Panama to Kansas Missouri. The Europeans are trying to gain control of New Orleans and they will have access to the Mississippi and Missouri Rivers. This divides the country into 3 sections breaking us up like they did Russia. If you vote Democrat or Republic nothing will change. The only solution is for each state to reclaim sovereignty which was lost in 1933.

Washington controls us through corporate laws and contracts. This is accomplished via "Martial Law" which is described in the constitution as only allowed during a war situation, thus keeping us at a state of war by declaring war on drugs, war on meth, Vietnam war, cold war, etc.

The war in Iraq is soon to be a war in Iran. The only way to resolve this is to declare sovereignty and pull together as a people.


THE PARAGON FOUNDATION
PRESS RELEASE
Alamogordo, New Mexico
Office of Public Relations
505-653-4024
Toll Free 1-877-847-3443

For Immediate Release: January 30, 2001

390 Words

RANGENET 2000 STRATEGY MEETING The long-term plan of RANGENET2000 is to force ranchers from all public lands

Cattleman And Property Rights Groups To Meet In Los Vegas, Nevada

In a December 2000 meeting, eighteen environmental activist groups from the eleven western states, several other states and Canada, gathered in Reno, Nevada to plot and jointly sign on to a scheme to force some 20,000 BLM grazing permit holders from federal lands. The plan, called RANGENET2000, is considered by the cattle industry as a serious threat to all public lands users. The long-term plan of RANGENET2000 is to force ranchers from all public lands by listing more endangered species.

A RANGENET2000 attendee, Attorney Marl Salvo of the Oregon based American Lands stated "Conservationists must address the symptoms of degraded ecosystems through the Endangered Species Act. While sage grouse are considered a good candidate for protection, federal biologists have admitted that any number of other sagebrush obligate species could also be successfully petitioned for listing."

In response to RANGENET 2000, members and directors of The Paragon Foundation, People's Alliance for Jobs and the Environment (PAJE) Foundation, Frontiers of Freedom / People for the USA and the Public Land Council and others will conduct a strategy meeting on February 24, 2001, in Las Vegas, Nevada.

According to the organizers, the meeting will be an open discussion format. They state that topics to be discussed will include but are not limited to:

Re-authorization of the Endangered Species Act with Amendments. Amendments might include scientific peer-reviewed studies, public and Congressional hearings.

Exposing the Foundations Financing RANGENET2000 The ranching industry has long pointed accusing fingers at environmental groups for forcing them from the range. It is time NOW to inform the public about the hidden financing of greens by major foundations. Facts and figures on foundations that are financing RANGENET2000 will be disclosed.

Media and Lobbying Campaign J. Zane Walley, through a Paragon Foundation grant, will present a comprehensive strategy to expose and strongly impact the foundations financing RANGENET2000. Ronnie Meritt of the PAJE Foundation will explain how PAJE is mounting a Public Service Announcement campaign on the airways.

The organizers invite all concerned parties to attend to the meeting. Special rate reservations are available At The New Frontier Hotel / Casino. Call 1-800-421-7806 and ask to reserve a room for the RANGE FIGHTER CONFERENCE.

For More Information, Call THE PARAGON FOUNDATION Toll Free at 1-877-847-3443 or email [email protected]

http://www.rangebiome.org/headlines/nr/rangefighter.html


Bush Administration Forest Service Raids Ranch Confiscating 300 Cattle -
Sheriff Denies Rancher Due Process of Law Protections - October 25, 2005
Greenlee County, Arizona. Since Saturday, twenty armed Forest Service employees and rented cowboys including neighboring rancher, Daryl Bingham and sons, have been gathering 300 head of cattle, valued at approximately $250,000, in a para-military raid on the Dan Martinez Ranch in Greenlee County, Arizona.
Greenlee County Sheriff, Steven Tucker, refused to uphold the law by allowing the federal government to seize the cattle without the necessary court order, denying Mr. Martinez his Constitutional procedural due process of law protections.
On October 3, 2005, in an apparent direct violation of both state and federal laws, the State of Arizona Department of Agriculture entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Forest Service, which by edict removed the Constitutional obstacle requiring the Forest Service to first obtain a court order prior to the seizure of property, in this instance, cattle. The State previously required a court order to impound livestock and this about-face in policy came on direct orders from Governor Napolitano. In addition, contrary to the terms of the MOU, the Forest Service blocked Mr. Martinez from removing his cattle from the grazing allotments last week.
"The Forest Service, apparently disturbed that Mr. Martinez did not renew his voluntary grazing permit with the federal government, has been attempting for the last three years to run him out of business, even going so far as to trump up criminal charges for maintaining his road as an 1866 Mining Law right-of-way. Now, with the State's help, they may succeed in breaking him," commented G.B. Oliver, Executive Director, Paragon Foundation. "If the State isn't careful, some rancher may end up owning a court house before this is over," he added.
Martinez , a second generation owner of the 160-year old Martinez ranch, which includes the Hickey and Pleasant Valley grazing allotments, commented from his home in Santa Fe , NM , "I'm not in dispute with the Forest Service. I have always agreed to do anything they ask of me as long as they could show me where they had the authority and jurisdiction to manage my private property such as my vested water rights, forage, improvements and rights-of-ways on my grazing allotments. They have never come forth with any such evidence. As it was, I could not afford to run cattle under the punitive terms and conditions of their voluntary grazing permit program."
Under the MOU, which has no force of law, the Martinez cattle may now be seized as "stray" livestock. The branded cattle clearly do not fall within the lawful definition of "strays", meaning unbranded and unclaimed livestock.
Retired Congressman, Helen Chenoweth-Hage (R-ID) and Chairman of the Nevada Livestock Association, which battled and stopped similar cattle seizures in Nevada, pointed out that, "The State of Arizona, under this MOU, is depriving Mr. Martinez of his Constitutionally guaranteed procedural due process of law protections. The State is allowing the federal government to drive away, sell and slaughter his cattle, depriving Mr. Martinez of his livelihood without ever having a day in court. The State is clearly exposing itself to liability for civil rights and Constitutional Fifth Amendment "takings" of property violations."
The grazing permit has become a contentious issue in the West where the Forest Service has often used the terms and conditions of the permit to harass, intimidate and bankrupt family ranchers. Traditionally, ranchers voluntarily signed grazing permits in order to participate in the cooperative range improvement fund, financed by their grazing fees. As the requirements of these permits become increasingly punitive and onerous, some ranchers have opted out of the range improvement fund.
"The land management agencies, fearful of a mass exodus from the grazing permit program, have turned to mafia-style fear and intimidation tactics to ensure ranchers renew their permits," commented Chenoweth-Hage. "Most ranchers don't want to risk loosing their livestock and livelihood at gun point. It's a very effective tool of intimidation. Three years ago I publicly issued a $1,000 challenge to anybody who could produce the law requiring ranchers to sign grazing permits. I still have my $1,000." top
Judge Napolitano Speaks in Alamogordo, NM - October 22, 2005
Paragon Foundation, Inc, held its 2005 seminar entitled "Constitutional Chaos" at the Sgt. Willie Estrada Memorial Civic Center in Alamogordo, New Mexico, on Saturday, October 22, 2005.
The featured speaker was Judge Andrew Napolitano, author of the book, "Constitutional Chaos." Judge Napolitano appears daily on The Big Story with John Gibson. He co-hosts FOX and Friends once a week and appears regularly on The O'Reilly Factor. Napolitano joined the FOX News Channel in May 1998 and currently serves as a senior judicial analyst.


http://www.paragonfoundation.org/newsandinformation.htm#Bush%20Administration



Sheriff Warns Hage of Possible Cattle Confiscation and Arrest - August 18, 2004
NYE COUNTY, NEVADA: According to Nye County Sheriff, Tony DeMeo, the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management (BLM), in the midst of finalizing post-trial briefs in a thirteen-year old lawsuit with Nye County rancher, Wayne Hage, and in a move of apparent direct defiance of the several recent court decisions, are preparing to confiscate Hage's cattle on his ranch in Nye County, Nevada. Hage was notified Friday by Sheriff DeMeo, that Bob Abby, Nevada BLM Director, had told him that despite on-going litigation, the BLM could move forward with the confiscation, unless they receive a cease and desist order from the Court.
Alf Brandt, Interior Department Solicitor, and one of the Government's attorneys in the May Hage v. U.S. compensation trial in Reno, Nevada stated in a July 30, 2004, letter to Sheriff DeMeo that the, "BLM actions may result in Mr. Hage's appearance in federal court, which may provide him the opportunity to again present his legal theories and allow the federal court to adjudicate these issues." Brandt's letter also contained thinly veiled threats to arrest Hage.
Thursday, the U.S. Forest Service hand-delivered a three-day notice to Hage to remove livestock from the lands the U.S. Court of Federal Claims determined in its 2002 Final Decision and Finding of Fact to be "fee lands" to which Hage holds title. ("Fee" means the inheritable right to use.)
Sheriff DeMeo commented on the governments actions, "It is inexplicable to me why, after thirteen years of litigation, the BLM and Forest Service seem so anxious to go after Hage now. But there definitely seems to be an intensity building in this county, and I expect them to try something. I have instructed my deputies to protect the Constitutional rights of the citizens of Nye County, even if the perpetrator is the federal government," he added.
Concerned about a Ruby Ridge-style government "arrest," today, Hage forwarded a letter to Sheriff DeMeo stating that he believes the government's efforts to create a "confrontation" with him is a move of desperation on the part of the agencies, as a result evidence that surfaced at his trial in Reno in May.
The U.S. Forest Service, BLM, and southern Nevada water interests were implicated in a "conspiracy," according to court transcripts, to bankrupt the Hages, in order to obtain the abundant Pine Creek Ranch water for the benefit of Southern Nevada interests. In his letter, Hage stated that, "I believe Alf W. Brandt, as solicitor for the BLM Department of Interior, would like to find a way to eliminate me at the hands of some (federal) "Law Enforcement" personnel."
In the thirteen-year Fifth Amendment of the Constitution "takings" lawsuit in the U. S. Court of Federal Claims between the Hage family and the federal government, Hage has prevailed in all court rulings to date. In 1991, the federal government, in an attempt to de-rail Hage's civil "takings" case, attempted to prosecute him for destruction of government property. The case was reversed by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Nevada Live Stock Association Director, Ramona Morrison, remarked about the May trial. "The government's case faltered dramatically during the compensation trial. Every government witness was roundly impeached, or discredited, during cross examination. Facing the potential of incurring enormous damages in a ruling expected after the October closing arguments in Reno, and numerous "takings" cases brought by other ranchers who have found themselves in similar circumstances as Hage, the U.S. Forest Service and BLM have little chance at damage control. They may be acting in desperation to intimidate other ranchers from similar attempts to seek compensation when federal government takes their property."
Government Solicitor, Alf Brandt, justifies his actions in his letter to Sheriff DeMeo by stating that Hage is failing to keep his cattle on the forage of the 50-foot right-of-ways. Hage commented from his ranch, "The government argues that I must contain my cattle on 50-feet of either side of my 1866 ditch rights-of-ways, some of which are natural creeks. I defy anyone to show me where the Court has said that in any of the three published Decisions or in the one court Order. Yet, this is their justification for seeking my arrest. The government refuses to recognize that I am not a trespasser on my own ranch."

Contacts:
Tony DeMeo, Nye County Sheriff 775.751.7000
Ramona Morrison 775.424.0570
Wayne Hage 775.482.4187
Ladd Bedford, Esq., Attorney for Hage 415.905.0200


http://www.paragonfoundation.org/newsandinformation.htm#Bush%20Administration

 

[Econ101]

I saw a program on tv about the immigrant labor. One of the commentators, a newspaper guy, asked if people were willing to pay $5.00 per head for a head of cabbage if we made the pay go up from $5.00 per hour to 15.00 per hour for domestic labor.

Now, that statement to me seemed a little ridiculous. Let us say for argument's sake that a head of cabbage is $1.00 per head. For a head of cabbage to go up to $5.00 per head from that $1.00 per head based on an increase from 5 to 15 per hour, the migrant laboror would have to only harvest a total of 2.5 heads of cabbage per hour, if I did my math right this late at night. That just doesn't make sense.

Immigrant labor has provided cheap labor that the U.S. can exploit. They probably work harder than the average U.S. citizen in that manual labor, are younger, have less benefits, show up at work more consistently, and make less per hour. The only reason we have immigrant labor is because it is the cheapest form of labor to use.

If we didn't have them, prices would not go up but not nearly as much as the talking heads portray.

Now I don't have anything against Mexicans. From what I have seen they have a harder life in Mexico with no Social Security and low wages or they would not be coming to America. Nafta was supposed to help with the differences in incomes in the Nafta countries. It hasn't done that. All I can see that it has done is ship jobs overseas and make the oligarchs of Mexico and maybe a few corporations a little richer. So much for the kind of free trade that was sold as. We have more Mexican immigrants here after Nafta than before and old Mexico hasn't changed much at all.

My parents used to live in Harlingen (sp?), Tx on the Mexican border and I had a roommate who lived in Nuevo Laredo. They both say the same thing.

I think it is time we stopped being hoodwinked by trade agreements that are sold as one thing and are really something else.

I don't have a lot of problem with trade with Canada because they are so similar to the U.S. as far as the social and economic system go. We should have required Mexico to share its wealth with its people better instead of Mexicanizing the U.S. political system in respect to poltical donations, grease, or to put it a little more blatently: political bribes.

I have just read an article on the Scanlon, Abramhoff, Delay republican scandal and it just makes you sick how pathetic our politicians have become. I am a staunch republican on their platform but I don't think they are following their platform at all. We have huge budget deficits, corruption in many segments (don't forget the SEC, FDA, USDA, and other regulatory problems of the last 5 yrs.). Politicians are representing their party before their constituents. It seems to me we have a president who is masquerading as an ethical religious conservative but the facts seem contrary to the illusion he is trying to portray.

I know some of this doesn't belong on ranchers bull session, but sometimes you have to look at the bigger picture and see how you fit in the scheme of things. It just seems to me that something stinks in the state of Denmark and we are being told it is the smell of good cheese. I don't buy it anymore.

I have been trapped in the loylaty over integrity thing before in my life and I came to the conclusion a long time ago that integrity has to come first, then loyalty. That goes for the politial party, religion, friends, enemies, and everything else in life including self interest. Why can't our politicians come to the same conclusion? It is the basic conclusion to the analogy I used with Tam and MRJ on child abuse. Heck, they even passed a law on reporting child abuse to help people with that moral delima.

These seasonal workers are people too. Our national policy of free trade and globalization should not be just about how it benefits our corporations or foreign corporations, but how it also benefits the people of those countries. It does no good to allow China to sell to the U.S. when the chinese don't allow the populace to obtain those profits of trade and buy something back from us. And I am not talking about my children's debt and tax burden.

There are a lot of things wrapped up in this immigrant debate. I just hope we don't get it wrong for the wrong reasons.

 

[T3023]

The other day I transported a patient to the hospital for a check up. She politely said to me…..
"Do you know they have been talking to me about placing a chip in me that gives all my medical history. I almost fell out of my seat…..

Then the same day I transported another patient and something was said about our "King".
This little old 69 yr old gentleman sat up in his wheel chair and said…..you know I was raised in the same town and went to the same school. He was a pot smoking, drunk in his youth, but the cops would never arrest him because they were afraid of loosing their jobs…….

I guess once a "King" always a King.

:shock: