posted 03-28-2001 12:05 AM
CRIMINAL THEFT OF HEALTHY SHEEP
Please read, forward and make the calls.
By now you've all probably heard the plight of the people in Vermont who've had their sheep confiscated by the criminals in the USDA. The controlled media claims the animals are suspected of having Mad Cow disease. Brave government agents came with their cammos, flack jackets, jack boots and semi automatics. "Just doing my job, ma'am". It's theft. Theft is a crime. However, when a government stooge commits a crime it's unlawfully legalized, and the criminals are under protection of immunity. I urge you to go into their website and read the chronology of this situation. You'll find it in "About Our Farm". Scroll down to the chronology of events.
In brief, after three years of research to find the strongest and healthiest, they brought the sheep in from Belgium in '96 to raise a breed that gives abundant milk. They make gourmet cheeses from the milk and have sold breeders to other families to start their own herds. Three children work the farm along with parents. That's why they named it "Three Shepherds Farm" They worked with the USDA through the entire phase. Sheep were quarantined before leaving Belgium and upon arrival. Passed quarantine with flying colors. Herd is healthy and testing negative every time tested.
1998 USDA approached stating their intent to destroy all imported herds. The families have refused and were threatened that if the word got out their farms would be destroyed. Dan Glickman, Secretary of Agriculture, admitted they want to kill the sheep because of political pressure. Dr. Joe Gibbs of NIH said, "... if the United States was perceived as having BSE, it would cause the stock market to crash." USDA says they will pay fair market value. However, they refuse to define "fair market value."
In March, 2000, the Vermont House of Representatives adopted resolution JRH -198, urging the USDA to lift the quarantine on the sheep; Vermont Senate tabled the resolution until the end of the legislative session. Why? Whose interests are being served by this action?
Dr. Richard Rubenstein from the Institute for Developmental Disabilities in New York claimed to have found positive TSE* (Mad Cow) results from four lambs from Skunk Hollow Farm. Long story short... tests results were a fraud; real tests - obtained by FOIA's - had been withheld by USDA which showed 60 of 60 tested were negative;
The USDA even got the U.S. House to appropriate $2.5 million to buy the farmers off. They've all refused. Money cannot replace five years of hard work and the love they have for their animals. U.S. Sen. Leahy stated on a local radio broadcast that Glickman was concerned the Belgium government had withheld information on the type of feed given to the animals before they were imported. Linda Faillace called in and exposed the fact that the USDA had all the reports for ten months.
USDA officials then came forth and said they withheld crucial information from Secretary Glickman and Federal Court. This information includes critical negative test results, as well as Belgian feed documents that show that the sheep were never fed meat and bone meal. These are the same feed documents that Glickman told Leahy were missing. To cover for Glickman's apparent lie, USDA officials said he didn't know they had the report? The Secretary of the USDA didn't know the USDA had information critical to this case? His underlings withheld information from him and the Federal Court?
To top this off, the USDA lawyers told a Federal Judge who granted a hearing to the Faillaces that the judge didn't have jurisdiction in the matter. They claimed that the Secretary of Agriculture can issue an emergency order without judicial review. Glickman declared an "extraordinary emergency" to seize and kill the herd. The government's motion states:
" . . . there is no procedural requirement under the Act for the plaintiffs to be heard and present evidence before the order is issued. There is no requirement under the statute that the order itself provide any discussion of the basis for the findings. . . . Nor is there any right conferred on the livestock owner to conduct an independent test for the communicable disease." The USDA lawyer also stated in court, "... the plaintiffs [Faillaces and Freeman] do not have the right to be heard before the Department of Agriculture, they do not have the right to present an expert witness, they do not have a right to demand an independent test."
In other words... only the government has rights.
All details aside, THE POINT IS: The USDA has no jurisdiction to come in to a state and seize healthy animals for slaughter. The Supreme Court has ruled numerous times that: No emergency or situation confers the power on the government to bypass any provision of the Constitution - especially pertaining to due process. So much for their "extraordinary emergency". The procedure they used is unlawful. It's a jurisdictional issue and they do not have jurisdiction. They claim that in an emergency they have jurisdiction in the State. They do NOT.
If we're going to help these people we have to work FAST. Fellaice's aren't sure whether the sheep have been killed yet or not. Here are some names and numbers they request you call. When you call, let them know that WE know the USDA has no jurisdiction in Vermont, and insist they intervene to stop the slaughter of the animals and have them returned to their owners. We suggest you do NOT beg the USDA to "follow their own procedures". It is conceding to unconstitutional usurpation of the rights of the people and the states, as their procedures are unconstitutional.
Secretary Ann M. Veneman Senator Patrick Leahy
Secretary of Agriculture Federal Building
1400 Independence Ave., S.W. PO Box 933
Ag Box 3491 Montpelier, VT 05601
Washington, D.C. 20250 Tel: 802-229-0569
Congressman Bernie Sanders Governor Howard Dean
1 Church Street 109 State Street
Burlington, VT 05401 Montpelier, VT 05609
Tel: 800-339-9834 Tel: 802-828-3333
Senator James Jeffords
58 State Street
Montpelier, Vermont 05601