This article was originally written and published on our old RowanReview.com
(broken links to comments are a bonus and free of charge!)

---

Cold water crik, more to the story?

ATV’s are all over the dang place, wherever the brownshirts ain’t.

“Thomas said the road construction in Rowan County was done to attach Laurel Road to Trent Ridge Road and to bring the road out of the creek bed, because [ATV's] were using it and muddying the water.”:http://www.themoreheadnews.com/local/local_story_078193135.html

The best efforts to contol erosion end up thuwarted by these 4whleers spinning in circles slinging mud in all directions with no reguard to themselves or others. What’s the real backstory here? Why is Thomas being made an example of? What did he not do that garners this much nitpicking.
Didn’t get the exit in or
the powerline thru the bird sanctuary…

---

The crick picture in the paper just a barometer of thangs to come…
Posted by TechKnomen at 2007-03-25 10:39 PM

I really like to have time to get out and enjoy our woodlands, hiking, camping, kayaking, mountain bike, fishing and such. I have been in several National park area and there are roads thru the creeks in say the Great Smokies International Biosphere that go right thru the creek and that is a biosphere where core areas are supposed to be free of all human activitiy to be a scientific reference.

Now I aint that gung ho about everything the Thomas days brought us but that is not my point. The level of attention to this one incident and the zealous enforcement of the letter of the regulations here are to be taken as a barometer of things to come. The UN man and the biosphere project would have all of the Daniel Boone or the boone as the tree huggers call it turned into a international biosphere reserve and use “non-governmental funny funds foundations”: and such to buy up whatever could be bought in Lewis county to make a corridor for large carnivors (from OHIO,inc. to Tennessee) that are said to require millions of acres to maintain breeding population MORE THAN 20 MILLION ACRES OF PRIVATE LAND COULD BE PURCHASED OVER THE NEXT DECADE WITH NO CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT (Search on google-earth and notice the green corridor from Ohio down into Tennesee).

Many many laws and regulations and code and executive disorders, signing statements and “decision directives” have been “passed” but not implemented in full as there have been a few pollitical snags and backlashes so for now “policy” keeps the car from being confiscated and crushed that dripped a few spots of ole’earl on the driveway.

All that has to happen is for the alphabet soup news networks to convince the sheeple that the demopulicrats have recieved a mandate from the sheople thru the electro shock voting machines. Hillbillery, Albercore, or Ketsup Kerry or the likes of the manchuriane Candidate McCain, take yur pick and say goodbye to your car. Of course the flipside of the same status quo coin is not much better; rfid, gps, tax by the mile and whatever else that supposed to make us feel safe.

Replies to this comment

Too much at stake 4thRiek Super NAFTA & TERRORISTS AT OKLAHOMA CITY
(Posted by TechKnomen at 2007-03-25 11:24 PM)

Right
(Posted by Americarus at 2007-03-26 09:16 PM)

“never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories concerning” Okcity
(Posted by TechKnomen at 2007-03-27 10:05 AM)

Re: crick picture in paper
(Posted by sdundee at 2007-04-22 01:11 PM)

YOU THINK THAT’S BAD? WELL LOOK AT THIS DISTURBING PIECE
(Posted by templar at 2007-04-22 03:24 PM)

WELL LOOK AT THIS DISTURBING PIECE
(Posted by templar at 2007-04-22 03:25 PM)

---

What makes this an old topic? Really?
Posted by TechKnomen at 2007-04-22 11:30 PM

That’s why I connected it to the biosphere stuff; just saw a piece last week on KET’s KentuckyLIFE about turning private property into core areas by foundations funny funds. The Forrest they showed was near the one turned into a core area (since they cant go there?) it was said to be old growth, never logged, and they pointed out old tree falls created cups in the hill side as a proof? Let me tell you as a woodsman/hiker/Mt.Biker; I have seen those all my life and nearly every tree was cut in and around Morehead at one time for corn fer the pigs to be sent for soapfat to P&G in Sinsinatti and/or “KAHNS” or other non-koshier packers with jewish names? If you ‘member the old McDonalds before it was rebuilt gay, they had blowup huge photos of Morehead/Clearfield with corn, crik to the ridgetop (circa 1880-1910). ((If you know where to look you can find old log “snake’n” trails where they used mules teams/trains to get out the ones that were not so big as to be split and quartered by dynomite. ))

SO this KET piece tells me their plans or goals for biospheres and core areas where humans may not go except by special dispensation from “guiya” and Capt. Planet are never ending meant to encompass all woodlands and any distigishable subspecies localised to a definable watershed.

---

Fish and Chips? No, Chickens Cows pigs/dogs and horses… “stakeholder”!
Posted by TechKnomen at 2007-04-23 12:08 PM

By Doreen Hannes April 22, 2007 NewsWithViews.com

All you have to do is register your property with the USDA under the National Animal Identification System. You’ll be assigned a seven-character number that stays with the property forever and the USDA “owns” that number according to ” A User Guide” which is their latest public document on the program.

The premise id number or PIN will set you solidly in the position of giving up your rights to ownership. How can I say that? Well, words have meaning for a reason. The USDA, in their original documents regarding NAIS, refers to participants as “stakeholders” repeatedly, twenty one times in the Draft Strategic Plan alone. They also use the term “national herd” and tell us that NAIS is necessary to protect the health and marketability of the “national herd”. First let’s look at the PIN and then at animal identification with official NAIS compliant tags.

The USDA claims to “own” the PIN (page6 A User Guide) and when one is assigned a PIN either through truly volunteering for it or being rolled into it via other disease control programs, it stays with the property forever (Draft Program Standards pg 16-read the whole section on PIN) and the person who owns the property becomes a stakeholder. The definition of stakeholder is as follows:

“The term stakeholder, as traditionally used in the English language in law and notably gambling, is a third party who temporarily holds money or property while its owner is still being determined.”

Yep. While it’s owner is still being determined. It doesn’t make me feel all warm and fuzzy. Now let’s look at the definition of ownership as a comparison. Wikipedia defines the term as follows:

“Ownership is the state or fact of exclusive possession or control of property, which may be an object, land/real estate, intellectual property or some other kind of property. It is embodied in an ownership right also referred to as title.”

So, if you have exclusive possession or control of the property in question, how can you be a stakeholder? Well, you can’t be. Either it’s your property, or it’s someone else’s property. With the NAIS, it’s not your property once you have a PIN making you a stakeholder and putting you under the jurisdiction of the Area Veterinarian In Charge or AVIC. (”A User Guide” is loaded with consult your AVIC with any questions about anything.)

This brings about some very serious questions regarding not only livestock but also real estate. Since the USDA “owns” the Premise Identification Number (page 6 “A User Guide”) and the number can only be inactivated and not expunged or completely annihilated, does it create an encumbrance on property with the PIN? Should that be part of the disclosure on the property? What happens if someone who doesn’t want to be in NAIS in any way buys property with a PIN? (You know, since it’s “voluntary”.) Are they automatically put into the position of stakeholder under the authority of the AVIC? Will the USDA expunge that PIN upon request? According to USDA documents, even though the program is ‘voluntary at the Federal level”, the PIN stays permanently with the property, not with the person who applied for the PIN. What about the person whose property was assigned a PIN via the roll in procedures that have been employed to increase premise registration numbers using other programs like scrapie and brand registration or participation in the QSA program for cattle? What are the answers to these questions? It sure looks like they will need to be determined in court, as the USDA has no answers available in any of their documents.

Then of course we want to know who owns the “national herd” anyway? It can’t be the stakeholder who has been assigned a premise identification number, because the stakeholder is waiting for the rightful owner to be determined, and it can’t be the county or the state if this is indeed the National Animal Identification System. When NAIS is in full implementation, all covered animals, 29 species from clams to cattle, will be required to have official identification. Official identification consists of a NAIS compliant number issued with the country code at the beginning. The country code for the United States is 840. It may or may not surprise you to learn that the 840 code covers all financial instruments, like stocks, checks, and bearable securities otherwise known as dollar bills. You can find this beautiful tidbit by searching for ISO-4217. This International Organization of Standards code covers only financial instruments. When I first looked into the 840 country code there was no designation for 840 under the claimed code of ISO-3166 which is a manufacturing standard. There were only two and three character alpha codes, like US and USA, in ISO-3166. The only assignations 6 months ago for “840″ were in the ISO-4217 standard which covers financial instruments and a UN assigned country code.

Regulations are already in place making it unlawful to remove or tamper with an official identification device. (User guide page 39) This regulation will lead to fully implemented three component NAIS in the not too distant future. Here’s the thing, if you cannot remove an NAIS tag from an animal and the person who sold the animal is a participant in NAIS then the sale of the animal will need to be reported as a high risk activity, and the premise id of the person buying the officially identified animal will have to be recorded, or assigned whichever the case may be, the premise id is not to be expunged only inactivated if animals are no longer held on the property. No rules have been promulgated regarding whether or not official devices must be disclosed as being affixed to the animal at a sale barn, so one could actually purchase an animal with no foreknowledge of it’s status as an NAIS compliant animal. However there are plenty of references to participation in the NAIS being built upon the PIN as the foundation of the system. You can’t have an NAIS id device on an animal without having a PIN, you can’t record events regarding an animal in the NAIS information repositories without having an NAIS identification device on the animal. It’s one, two, three, with the foundation of the entire system being premise identification and changing the status of the property holder from owner to stakeholder.

To further substantiate my claims, please look into the case of Mr. Dobbins in the United Kingdom. Some of his numbers on his registered show herd of dairy cattle were not jibing with their passports, so Defra (Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs, the UK’s USDA) took all of his cattle passports and confiscated his entire herd giving him 48 hours to positively identify all 576 of his cattle before they destroyed them. He couldn’t identify them because Defra had confiscated all of his documents. It’s like show me the title to the car, while I have taken the title and hidden it in my house thirty miles away. As an added slap in the face, no indemnity is necessary under EC regulations when animals are not identified in exact compliance with their regulations. The man’s entire livelihood was destroyed because not every piece of paper was in the prescribed order.

The USDA doesn’t seem to think we can add these things together well enough to see why we have no choice but to resist this scheme with everything we have because they truly believe we are not competent enough to see the correlations between other nation’s experiences with these systems and then extrapolate the consequences for ourselves. In the USDA’s NAIS How-To-Handbook for their partners in the crime of NAIS implementation, they advise that all messages for potential NAIS stakeholders be designed for a sixth grade reading level. They also give the major themes of those of us opposing the program and state that our arguments all fall into a few buckets. They never do address any of the arguments, and they fail to acknowledge two of the largest arguments of religious objections and Constitutional issues. The Handbook is quite a piece of work and illustrates how “open and transparent” the USDA really is about their desires for the program….After all, they are so open that we had to get a user name with a password to even see the documents they’ve spent taxpayer money developing to sell this program to people without full disclosure and with no actual cost analysis.

It seems to me that those at the top of the NAIS food chain think that since we trade real labor for fake money to pay fraudulent taxes on stuff we don’t own we wouldn’t notice just one more affront. It’s time to shake off your righteous indignation and ask these officials if they’d like some Boston Tea. ***

Please check out these links:

1, Christopher Booker’s notebook, Papers were not in order, so they had to die 2, Visit: www.nonais.org and scroll down the right hand side for USDA documents on NAIS. At the very least you need to read the 2005 Draft Strategic Plan, then The Implementation Plan and the User Guide.

© 2007 Doreen Hannes – All Rights Reserved

Sign Up For Free E-Mail Alerts

Doreen Hannes is a homesteading mom, and a truly grass roots activist for small scale and traditional farming rights. She has thoroughly researched the origins and impacts of “Free Trade” agreements and National Animal Identification System in particular and has been a major force in the anti-NAIS movement both nationally and in Missouri for over a year.

Her mission is to expose the procedures and methods being employed to destroy the God given rights of this once great republic. Doreen is a frequent guest on talk radio programs and has written extensively on the NAIS.

E-Mail: animalwaitress@yahoo.com

Replies to this comment

in less than 20years these chips and scanners will be evarwhair
(Posted by TechKnomen at 2007-04-26 10:26 AM)

---

Let nature ruin its course: Groups sue over Boone logging
Posted by TechKnomen at 2007-04-29 12:57 AM

Great Nature surrounds the owl of Bohemia and can take care of the forrest without our stewardship?

The Ice and wind storms that leave damaged and disease suseptable trees are part of nature and it should just run its course, healthcare should be stopped for humans as well, let nature ruin its course “The Boone” was the term used when I first ran into a leader of these activists, that lived in a log cabin, about 10years ago, if you can hang out without suspicion when they talk casually, you’ll get the adgenda to refer to the easter 3rd of the state as a forrest not just the national and state forrest holdings, but the strategic uses of foundations aquisistions to knit together the millions of contiguous acres for large carnivores, like cougar and black and brown bears, wolves, red wolves, cayote and maybe a cloned sabertooth?LOL?

Replies to this comment

Flag across from Wendy’s at the park
(Posted by Kat at 2007-04-29 01:26 AM)

Huddle House Menu?
(Posted by Kat at 2007-04-29 01:35 AM)

Uh yeah anthing fer a diabetic?
(Posted by TechKnomen at 2007-04-29 01:48 AM)

what’s the deal about ‘diabetic’ tech?
(Posted by Kat at 2007-04-29 02:40 AM)

Someone else can answer your post I cant or wont prevent that?
(Posted by TechKnomen at 2007-04-30 10:45 AM)

You’re slamming ME for having diabetes!
(Posted by Kat at 2007-04-30 09:27 PM)

RE:WaffleHouse (duh)
(Posted by Kat at 2007-04-30 09:31 PM)

Ole to Technonut
(Posted by Kat at 2007-05-01 02:59 AM)

100 years ago Average folks ate 4lbs of SUGAR a year now its 60-160lbs.
(Posted by TechKnomen at 2007-05-01 11:04 AM)

McDougall Program Dietary Program
(Posted by Kat at 2007-05-01 11:40 AM)

but but I saw it on oprah?
(Posted by TechKnomen at 2007-05-01 04:03 PM)

Memo to the FDA: you folks are supposed to KNOW, scientifically, not just “believe”
(Posted by TechKnomen at 2007-05-02 10:24 AM)

I was not harping on you but the selections on the menu in the supposed land of free choice
(Posted by TechKnomen at 2007-05-01 11:11 AM)

Thread was for the enviromental implications for the cold water crik story…
(Posted by TechKnomen at 2007-05-01 03:41 PM)

flip it upside down
(Posted by TechKnomen at 2007-04-29 01:57 AM)

Some background on “the boone”
(Posted by TechKnomen at 2007-04-29 01:39 AM)

---

This bureaucrat knows it defects her “stakeholdership!-she re-drew the boundaries of a particular endangered bird’s habitat to keep her family’s farm outside
Posted by TechKnomen at 2007-05-03 12:46 PM

A deputy assistant secretary at the Interior Department resigned Monday, a month after the department’s inspector general issued a stinging report that said she violated federal rules by giving industry lobbyists internal agency documents and rode roughshod over agency scientists.

The resignation came about a week before a House committee was set to hold hearings on political interference with biologists, and the same day that Senator Ron Wyden, Democrat of Oregon, wrote Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne demanding that he take action to address the concerns about the official, Julie A. MacDonald, who was overseeing the Fish and Wildlife Service.

Efforts to reach Ms. MacDonald were unsuccessful.

The department issued no formal statement about her resignation, nor did it release the text of any resignation letter. Hugh Vickery, a spokesman for the wildlife service, said that the resignation was a personnel matter and that department officials would not comment on it.

Even as environmental groups issued statements of satisfaction with the departure of an official who had become a magnet for accusations of political interference with the work of federal biologists, they and Congressional critics said they were not convinced that the interference would end.

Representative Nick J. Rahall II, Democrat of West Virginia and chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee, said Tuesday in a statement, “The problems at the Fish and Wildlife Service are not merely a matter of people and personalities; the faults run much deeper than Julie MacDonald.”

Mr. Rahall added that his committee would investigate them in its House hearing next week.

Kieran Suckling, policy director of the Center for Biological Diversity, said: “Julie MacDonald’s reign of terror over the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is finally over. Endangered species and scientists everywhere are breathing a sigh of relief. But MacDonald was the administration’s attack dog, not its general.”

Among other actions that drew the ire of wildlife biologists and lawyers, Ms. MacDonald had heavily edited biologists’ reports on sage grouse, a species that in the end was not placed on the threatened or endangered lists. Their habitat overlaps with vast parts of the Rocky Mountain West, where oil and gas drilling and cattle ranching are prevalent; listing the grouse as endangered or threatened could have curbed those industries’ access to federal lands.

In another case in the inspector general’s report, Ms. MacDonald demanded that scientists reduce the nesting range for the Southwest willow flycatcher to a radius of 1.8 miles, from a 2.1-miles, so it would not cross into California, where her husband has a ranch

(because she knows it defects the title as to more restricted use by “stakeholders”)

---

Among the possible culprits behind CCD are: a fungus, a virus, a bacterium, a pesticide (or combination of pesticides), GMO crops bearing pesticide genes
Posted by TechKnomen at 2007-05-03 02:26 PM

Everything you didn’t want to know about Colony Collapse Disorder
It sounds” like the start of a Kurt Vonnegut novel

Nobody worried all that much about the loss of a few animal species here and there until one day the bees came to their senses and decided to quit producing an unnaturally large surplus of honey for our benefit. One by one, they went on strike and flew off to parts unknown.

Among the various mythologies of the apocalypse, fear of insect plagues has always loomed larger than fear of species loss. But this may change, as a strange new plague is wiping out our honey bees one hive at a time. It has been named Colony Collapse Disorder, or CCD, by the apiculturalists and apiarists who are scrambling to understand and hopefully stop it. First reported last autumn in the U.S., the list of afflicted countries has now expanded to include several in Europe, as well as Brazil, Taiwan, and possibly Canada. (1)(24)(29)

Apparently unknown before this year, CCD is said to follow a unique pattern with several strange characteristics. Bees seem to desert their hive or forget to return home from their foraging runs. The hive population dwindles and then collapses once there are too few bees to maintain it. Typically, no dead bee carcasses lie in or around the afflicted hive, although the queen and a few attendants may remain.

Replies to this comment

I have been looking for a hive or three for a while…
(Posted by TechKnomen at 2007-05-03 03:08 PM)

---

Another article on Common Chemicals Pose Dangers . . .
Posted by TechKnomen at 2007-05-27 10:45 AM

Common Dreams

In a strongly worded declaration, many of the world’s leading environmental scientists warned Thursday that exposure to common chemicals makes babies more likely to develop an array of health problems later in life, including diabetes, attention deficit disorders, prostate cancer, fertility problems, thyroid disorders and even obesity.

The declaration by about 200 scientists from five continents amounts to a vote of confidence in a growing body of evidence that humans are vulnerable to long-term harm from toxic exposures in the womb and during their first years. 0525 02

Convening in the Faroe Islands in the North Atlantic, toxicologists, pediatricians, epidemiologists and other experts warned that when fetuses and newborns encounter various toxic substances, growth of critical organs and functions can be skewed. In a process called “fetal programming,” the children then are susceptible to diseases later in life – and perhaps could even pass on those altered traits to their children and grandchildren.

The scientists’ statement also contained a rare international call to action. The effort was led by Dr. Philippe Grandjean of Harvard University and the University of Southern Denmark, and Dr. Pal Weihe of the Faroese Hospital System, who have spent more than 20 years studying children exposed to mercury.

Many governmental agencies and industry groups, particularly in the United States, have said there is no or little human evidence to support concerns about most toxic residue in air, water, food and consumer products. About 80,000 chemicals are registered in the United States.

Yet the scientists urged leaders not to wait for more scientific certainty and recommended that governments revise regulations and procedures to take into account subtle effects on fetal and infant development.

Chemicals with evidence of developmental effects include compounds in plastics, cosmetics and pesticides.

“Given the ubiquitous exposure to many environmental toxicants, there needs to be renewed efforts to prevent harm. Such prevention should not await detailed evidence on individual hazards,” the scientists wrote in the four-page statement.

Genetic concerns

The scientists are particularly concerned that the newest animal research suggests that chemicals can alter gene expression – turning on or off genes that predispose people to disease. Although the DNA itself would not be altered, such genetic misfires in the womb may be permanent, and all subsequent generations could be at greater risk of diseases too.

“Toxic exposures to chemical pollutants during these windows of increased susceptibility can cause disease and disability in childhood and across the entire span of human life,” the scientists concluded.

The “Barker hypothesis,” conceived by a British scientist in 1992, says human fetuses are “programmed” for diseases by their early environment. The scientists concluded that this is now well-documented for toxic exposures by a large collection of animal experiments and some human data.

“A sad aspect with many of these prenatal exposures is that they leave the mother unscathed while causing injury to her fetus,” said Dr. Philip Landrigan, a pediatrician who chairs the Mount Sinai School of Medicine’s Department of Community and Preventive Medicine. He was one of the statement’s authors.

In a more optimistic vein, the researchers said that if contaminants do play a big role in human health problems, some diseases could be prevented.

“Reducing exposure would lead to tremendous benefits,” said Dr. Bruce Lanphear, director of the Environmental Health Center at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center. “We shouldn’t wait for an epidemic to fully mature before we develop policies to protect children.”

For centuries, the basic rule of toxicology has been “the dose makes the poison.” Now, the scientists say “the timing makes the poison” – in other words, when a toxic exposure occurs is as important as the amount people are exposed to.

The fetus “is extraordinarily susceptible to perturbation of the intrauterine environment,” they wrote.

The growing brain is the most sensitive. Mothers’ exposure to mercury and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in fish and other seafood can cause slight declines in a child’s IQ and motor skills. In addition, early exposure to pesticides might trigger Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s diseases.

Also, children exposed to lead, organophosphate pesticides or cigarette smoke have greater risk of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. One of every three cases – or an estimated 560,000 children in the United States – can be attributed to lead exposure or prenatal tobacco smoke exposure, Lanphear reported in a study published in December.

The immune, reproductive and cardiovascular systems also are vulnerable to early damage. Children exposed prenatally to PCBs have a high rate of infections and weak response to vaccinations. Many chemicals also can mimic hormones, and in animal tests, they feminize newborns, lowering sperm counts and promoting prostate, testicular, uterine and breast cancers.

In the newest area of research, metabolic systems, which control how nutrients are converted into energy, have been altered by chemicals administered in animal experiments – changes that may contribute to obesity and diabetes.

Chemical danger

“These adverse effects have been linked to chemical pollutants at realistic human exposure levels similar to those occurring from environmental sources,” the scientists wrote.

Among the risky chemicals they named are bisphenol A, found in polycarbonate plastic food and water containers; the pesticides atrazine, vinclozolin and DDT; lead; mercury; phthalates used in some cosmetics and soft plastics; brominated flame retardants; arsenic, which contaminates some water supplies; and PCBs, banned but ubiquitous, particularly in fish.

Some of the chemicals have been regulated in the United States, but many have not. Moreover, the scientists said, tests for developmental effects are not routinely required, so “the potential for such effects is therefore not necessarily considered in decisions on safety levels of environmental exposures.”

There is “an incredible gap,” Landrigan said, because 80% of major chemicals in commerce have never been tested to see if they damage early development.

The conference was funded by the World Health Organization, National Institutes of Health, European Environment Agency and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Denmark’s Faroe Islands, just south of the Arctic Circle, were the venue because the region is home to the longest-running human experiment analyzing prenatal toxic exposure. Since 1986, Grandjean and Weihe have tracked Faroese children from the womb to adolescence to monitor neurological effects of mercury in seafood. Their findings prompted U.S. advisories that children and women of childbearing age avoid swordfish and other highly contaminated fish.

In addition to Landrigan, three Californians and six other U.S. scientists served on the 28-member committee that wrote the consensus: Brenda Eskenazi of UC Berkeley, Irva Hertz-Picciotto of UC Davis, Beate Ritz of UCLA, Jerry Heindel and Kimberly Gray of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Larry Needham of the CDC, Terry Huang of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, David Bellinger of Harvard University and Howard Hu of the University of Michigan.

marla.cone@latimes.com

follow the link the comments are on there…