The U.S. Senate is considering a bill, S. 510, to reform the food safety system. Although reform of the industrial food supply is clearly needed, this bill threatens to create more problems than it will solve. S. 510 would undermine the rapidly growing local foods movement by imposing unnecessary, burdensome regulations on small farms and food processors – everyone from your local CSA to the small bakers, jam makers, and people making fermented vegetables to sell at the local farmers market.

FDA Regulation of Local Food Processors Is Unnecessary and Burdensome

Federal regulations may be needed for industrial processing that source raw ingredients from multiple locations (sometimes imported from other countries) and ship their products across the country. But federal regulation is overkill for small local processors. State and local public health laws are enough for local food sources.

HACCP Will Not Improve Food Safety and Will Harm Small Processors

S. 510 applies a complex and burdensome Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) system to even the smallest local food processors. The HACCP system, with its requirements to develop and maintain extensive records, has proven to be an overwhelming burden for a significant number of small regional meat processors across the country. In the meat industry, HACCP has not eliminated the spread of E-coli and other pathogens and has resulted in fewer independent inspections of the large slaughter plants where these pathogens originate. At the same time, small regional processors have been subject to sanctions due to paperwork violations that posed no health threat. Applying a HACCP system to small, local foods processors could drive them out of business, reducing consumers’ options to buy fresh, local foods.

S. 510 Puts FDA On The Farm

S. 510 calls for FDA regulation of how farms grow and harvest produce. Given the agency’s track record, it is likely that the regulations will discriminate against small, organic, and diversified farms. The House version of the bill directs FDA to consider the impact of its rulemaking on small-scale and diversified farms, but there are no enforceable limits or protections for small diversified and organic farms from inappropriate and burdensome federal rules.

What The House Has Done

On July 30, the U.S. House passed its version of a food safety bill, H.R. 279:

√ The Good: The House added a definition for “retail food establishments” that allows for some cottage level processing without invoking FDA regulation. Over 50% of the product must be sold at retail to qualify. The amendments also inserted some exemptions in the registration and record-keeping sections of the bill for farmers selling direct to consumers

√ The Bad: HR 2749 continues to direct FDA to set standards for how farmers grow and harvest some types of produce, such as leafy greens, even for the small farmers selling directly to consumers

√ The Ugly: HR 2749 puts local facilities processing local foods for local markets under the same regulatory regime, and paying the same fees, as the major industrialized agribusinesses, like Dole or Del Monte

The focus is now on the Senate. The major foodborne illness outbreaks and recalls have all been within the large, industrial food system. Small, local food producers have not contributed to the highly publicized outbreaks. Yet both the House and Senate bills subject the small, local food system to broad federal regulatory oversight. Increased regulations, record-keeping obligations, and the penalties and fees could destroy small businesses bringing food to local communities. Take action today to protect local food producers, promote food safety, and help your local economy!

Take Action

Contact both of your U.S. Senators and ask them to push for amendments to SB 510 to:

(a) CLEARLY exempt intrastate foods,
(b) also exempt foods sold in local foodsheds.

Call the Capitol switchboard at (202) 224-3121 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting              (202) 224-3121      end_of_the_skype_highlighting.

Also contact the Chair and Ranking Member of the HELP Committee:

Chairman Harkin, (p): 202-224-0767, (f): 202-224-5128
Senator Enzi, Ranking Member, (p): 202-224-6770

Spread the word in your community! You can download a flyer at http://farmandranchfreedom.org/content/files/Food-safety-Flyer-090924.pdf

Henry Lamb of Sovereignty International reports that Senator Christopher Dodd has introduced his “Livable Communities Act” (S-1619). This bill will establish two new bureaucracies: The Office of Sustainable Housing and Communities” within the Department of Housing and Urban Development, and the “Interagency Council on Sustainable Communities.”

According to Lamb, the Office of Sustainable Housing and Communities will be charged with administering two new grant programs. One program will pay for multi-regional comprehensive planning; the other will pay for the projects called for in the multi-regional plans. Nearly $4 billion is authorized to be appropriated. The Interagency Council on Sustainable Communities will see that Sustainable Development policies are implemented throughout the federal government. The council will consist of cabinet secretaries or their designees. The council will be authorized to hire a staff to “ensure interagency coordination of federal policy on sustainable development.”

For years, as Lamb reports, various departments of the federal government have encouraged “Sustainable Development,” with a variety of grants to local communities, states and NGOs. This bill, if enacted, will set in bureaucratic concrete the concept and plan for sustainable development as set forth in the UN’s Agenda 21 soft law policy.

As a basis for his legislation, Dodd lists 20 “findings” which may or may not be true, according to Lamb, “but certainly does not provide an accurate picture.” “For example,” Lamb goes on, “he says that between 1980 and 2000, population growth in 99 urban centers ‘consumed’ 16 million acres of rural land. What he did not say is that all urban land in all the cities occupies only 60 million acres, or 2.6% of the 2.3 billion acres in this country.” Lamb goes on to point out, “Land designated as ‘wilderness’ however, occupies more than 107 million acres. Wilderness is land on which no human activity – other than walking carefully – is allowed.”

Dodd’s bill, like all sustainable development propaganda, paints a warm and fuzzy picture of what “livable” or “sustainable communities should be. As Lamb reports, “The propaganda fails to point out that in order to achieve this Marxist utopia, government has to enforce the vision. This means that people must live where government says they must live; in homes that meet the government’s design criteria; and travel to work in vehicles approved by government.”

The end result of he comprehensive land-use plan is to draw lines on a map, which deprives individuals of private property rights whose land is outside the urban boundary zones – commonly called “Smart Growth.” The value of land inside urban boundary zones skyrockets, as does the cost of living for all who reside there.

Dodd’s bill goes a long way to transforming America into what looks a lot like regional soviets where unelected agency appointees draft a plan by which all must live, and then enforce the plan with the power of law. “Such a place, says Lamb,” cannot be described as ‘the land of the free.’ Nor can it be called ‘the home of the brave’ if voters allow this transformation to continue.”

Concluded Lamb, “This bill is not likely to move until the other major issues confronting Congress are resolved. Rest assured, S-1619 will not go away. Get prepared now to persuade your representatives to reject  S-1619, and all elements of the freedom-eroding concept of Sustainable Development.

Action to take: Start today to call your U.S. Senators and tell them you oppose S-1619. Sustainable Development is not a local or US concept. It is international policy based on the UN’s Agenda 21 and Climate Change. Proof of Climate Change is now in major dispute and massive policy based on it must be rejected.

Senate Switchboard: 202-224-3121 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting              202-224-3121      end_of_the_skype_highlighting begin_of_the_skype_highlighting              202-224-3121      end_of_the_skype_highlighting.  Ask for your Senators by name.

Longevity apparently does not count for much in Britain’s government-managed National Health Service.

Much of 108-year-old Olive Beal’s hearing was gone. The one-time suffragette and former piano teacher from Kent, England was unable to enjoy music or hear conversations clearly with her five-year-old analog hearing aid. A modern digital device would improve Beal’s hearing – and life – tremendously, but she was having difficulty receiving a replacement.

Beal’s granddaughter, Maria Scott, explained: “Her analog hearing aid does not filter out background noise so it makes it very difficult for her to hear clearly. But the digital one would allow her to hear people talking to her and to CDs. She loves music hall numbers.”

Beal was administered a hearing test in late July 2007, and a hearing expert recommended a digital hearing device. However, the local health authority, Eastern and Coastal Kent Primary Care Trust, has an 18-month waiting list for new hearing aids provided through the NHS. Despite her age and despite contributing income taxes that fund the government’s universal health system into her late 60s, Beal was told she must wait her turn in line. A spokesman for the Eastern and Coastal Kent Primary Care Trust explained: “[P]riority is given to patients who do not have an existing hearing aid…”

Under the government system, Beal would be 110 years old by the time the new hearing aid was scheduled to arrive.

Beal expressed her fear: “I could be dead by then.”

Maria Scott added, “I would have thought they would take her age into account as she probably has not got 18 months to wait… Her eyesight is falling [sic], and if she cannot hear then she will be isolated from the outside world.”

Fortunately, widespread press attention and concern about Beal’s situation prompted Phillip Ball, a private audiologist, to assist Beal voluntarily. Ball said:

“I can see no reason why a lady of her age should be fobbed off by her NHS Trust and told to wait at least 18 months, so I immediately got on the phone to offer my services. I visited Olive this week and she should have a fully functioning digital aid in a matter of days [early August 2007]. She will now be able to hear a great deal better.”

A digital hearing device costs approximately 1,000 British pounds (~$1,600) each, and wait times for hearing aids can be over two years in some parts of Britain.

“The new digital hearing aids can really transform people’s lives,” said Donna Tipping of the Royal National Institute for the Deaf, a British charity. “It is an issue of quality of life, with isolation, frustration and withdrawing from society caused by loss of hearing, and it is sad because this is reversible.”

As her grandmother is one of Britain’s oldest living citizens, Maria Scott added, “I thought a 108-year-old deserved to be treated better than this.”

________________________________________________________

This is one of a hundred stories in the new book Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care published by the National Center for Public Policy Research and written by Amy Ridenour and Ryan Balis. Permission is granted to reproduce this story and other stories from Shattered Lives on condition that a link to http://www.nationalcenter.org/ShatteredLives.html is included with the reprint. To request interviews with the authors or other information, contact Judy Kent at (703) 759-7476 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting              (703) 759-7476      end_of_the_skype_highlighting or David Almasi at (202) 543-4110 or email info@nationalcenter.org.

The Hacked CRU E-mails

• From: Phil Jones. To: Many. Nov. 16, 1999

“I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature (the science journal) trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.”

Critics cite this as evidence that data was manipulated to mask the fact that global temperature are falling. Prof. Jones claims the meaning of “trick” has been misrepresented.

• From: Phil Jones To: Michael Mann (Pennsylvania State University). July 8, 2004

“I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin and I will keep them out somehow – even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!”

The IPCC is the UN body charged with monitoring climate change. The scientists did not want it to consider studies that challenge the view that global warming is genuine and man-made.

• From: Kevin Trenberth (US National Center for Atmospheric Research) To: Michael Mann. Oct 12, 2009

“The fact is we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t. Our observing system is inadequate.”

Prof. Trenberth appears to accept a key argument of global warming skeptics – that there is no evidence temperatures have increased over the past 10 years.

• From: Phil Jones. To: Many. March 11, 2003

“I will be emailing the journal to tell them I’m having nothing more to do with it until they rid themselves of this troublesome editor.”

Prof. Jones appears to be lobbying for the dismissal of the editor of “Climate Research,” a scientific journal that publishes papers downplaying climate change.

• From: Phil Jones. To: Michael Mann. May 29, 2008

“Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4? Keith will do likewise.”

Climate change skeptics tried to use Freedom of Information laws to obtain raw climate date submitted to an IPCC report known as AR4. The scientists did not want their email exchanges about the data to be made public.

• Michael Mann replied:

“I’ll contact Gene about this  ASAP.”

Gene Wald is a NOAA employee

• From Michael Mann. To: Phil Jones and Gabi Hegerl (University of Edinburgh). Aug. 10, 2004

“Phil and I are likely to respond to more crap criticisms from the idiots in the near future.”

The scientists make no attempt to hide their for climate change skeptics who request more information about their work.

More evidence of the global warming cover up and data manipulation: In the October, 1997 issue of The DeWeese Report, (Vol. 3, Issue 10), I reported that the following two paragraphs were deleted from the report of the 1996 IPCC report on Climate Change before it was issued to the public:

1. “None of the studies cited above has shown clear evidence that we can attribute the observed climate changes to increases in greenhouse gases.”
2. “No study to date has positively attributed all or part of the climate change to…man-made causes.”

By Tom DeWeese

In recent years Americans have become more and more alarmed at the lack of adherence to the U.S. Constitution exercised by Congress and other elected representatives. The list of violations has grown large indeed.

Some have tried to fight the violations through the election process, attempting to remove those representatives who have perpetrated them. Others have tried to fight infringing legislation as it is introduced. Still others have fought in the courts, attempting to defend liberties in front of judges who have sworn to uphold the Constitution.

To date, little has worked as many elected representatives and court rooms openly defy the Constitution, calling it antiquated. Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court announce that they now look to international law for precedence and guidance, rather than the Constitution. Government at all levels is growing ever further from the reach of the people. In such a growing desperate situation is it possible to restore the Republic to the vision of the Founding Fathers?

On November 11, 2009 116 delegates from 48 states gathered at Pheasant Run Resort in St. Charles, IL to see if they could bring together a plan to restore the Republic and reign in our runaway government. The event was the Continental Congress 2009 and was the brainchild of Robert Schulz, President of the We The People Foundation.

Throughout 2009, Schulz traveled the nation speaking out on the need for the People to take action to restore the Republic, citing in each case that “the Constitution cannot defend itself.”  As he explained it, “for 14 years, the People, through various means, have exhausted their administrative and judicial remedies – for example, the People have used their First Amendment Right “to petition the Government for a ‘Redress of Grievances,’ and have received no legitimate response from either the Judicial, Congressional or Executive branches.”

That action that Schulz envisioned was taken directly from the history of the nation, specifically the actions taken by our nation’s founders in 1774 when they were faced with a similar government that refused to listen. Then they called a Continental Congress with delegates representing the 13 Colonies. And so, just as in 1774, Continental Congress 2009 was called, with delegates elected by popular vote in each state. Their purpose was to review the Government’s violations of the Constitution and come up with a workable plan to fix it.

For ten solid days the delegates met, debated and worked in committees until the wee hours of the night to review the Government’s violations of fourteen of our Constitutionally guaranteed rights. Each matter was then referred to a sub-committee that was charged with recommending “Remedial instructions” to federal officials and to each of the several States, and Civic Actions for the People of the nation to take to assure elected representatives follow through with their instructions. I was privileged to have been elected as the first delegate from Virginia. I was also honored to address the Congress on issues such as the North American Union and to serve on the Property Rights Committee.

The final document produced by the Continental Congress, containing all of the reviews of violations, instructions to Congress and state legislature and the civil actions have been tied into one document called the “Articles of Freedom.”  Schulz summed up the work of the Continental Congress 2009, saying, “The Articles of Freedom demonstrate that we are in our Republic’s 11^th hour. It is undeniable that the leaders and members of each branch of the federal Government have failed to uphold their oaths of office, are ignoring the Constitution, committing acts far outside the law, and when petitioned for redress by the People they refuse to respond.”

What happens now to the tireless efforts of delegates? The work has only just begun, as each member of Congress and each state legislature will be personally presented with a copy of the Articles of Freedom as the demands of the People. It is, of course, expected that most officials will again ignore the documents.

That’s why the most important work will be to get the Articles of Freedom into the hands of millions of Americans across the nation, asking them to join the effort to bring pressure on Congress for action. The Continental Congress 2009 intends to enjoin a critical mass of at least 15million Americans to sign the Articles of Freedom. The documents will be used to give the TEA Party rallies a specific goal. Candidates for office, hoping to gain the support of the recharged freedom movement will be asked to sign the Articles of Freedom as their pledge to uphold the Constitution if elected.

If we Americans don’t claim and exercise our right to hold our servant government accountable, then each of our natural, un-alienable, individual rights will atrophy and die. Indeed, this process is well underway.

The documents may be seen at the website www.ArticlesofFreedom.us. They will also soon be brought to your community through rallies, public meetings and into your mailbox as part of a direct mail campaign. All are planned as part of the effort to build the critical mass of Americans necessary to make these documents historic, effective and powerful.

It is vital that every freedom-loving American take the same action as our Founders, to sign and support the Articles of Freedom and demand that our elected representatives take the actions outlined in these historic documents.

The Articles of Freedom establish the pathway back to Constitutional governance. It is time to instruct our servants on how to remedy what we have allowed them to ruin.

In defense of a free people, the time has come to reassert our God-given natural rights and cast off tyranny.

Let the facts reveal – the Federal Government of the United States of America, which was instituted to protect the rights of individual citizens, instead – threatens our life, liberty and property through usurpations of the Constitution; and emboldened by our own lack of responsibility and due diligence in these matters, has exceeded its mandate, and abandoned those founding principles which have made our nation exceptional

Our servant government has undertaken these unconstitutional actions in direct violation of their enumerated duties, to the detriment of the People’s liberty and the sovereignty of our Republic;

Over many years and spanning multiple political administrations, the People who have, in good conscience, attempted to deliberate our grievances and voice our dissent against these offensive actions through both petition and assembly, have been maligned and ignored with contempt;

The people of the several States of Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming, justly alarmed at these arbitrary and unconstitutional actions, have elected, constituted and appointed delegates to meet, and sit in general Congress in the city of St. Charles, Illinois.

Whereupon these delegates, as duly elected representatives of the several States, have gathered in defense of divine justice, liberty and the principles of limited government, and we stand in clear recognition of the supreme law of the land – the Constitution of the United States of America.

Therefore, We demand that Government immediately re-establish Constitutional rule of law, lest the People be forced to do so themselves; and we hereby serve notice that in the defense of Freedom and Liberty there shall be NO COMPROMISE to which we shall ever yield.

“I am a home grown American citizen, 53, registered Democrat all my life. Before the last presidential election I registered as a Republican because I no longer felt the Democratic Party represents my views or works to pursue issues important to me. Now I no longer feel the Republican Party represents my views or works to pursue issues important to me. The fact is I no longer feel any political party or representative in Washington represents my views or works to pursue the issues important to me. Instead, we are burdened with Congressional Dukes and Duchesses who think they know better than the citizens they are supposed to represent.

There must be someone. Please tell me who you are. Please stand up and tell me that you are there and that you’re willing to fight for our Constitution as it was written. Please stand up now. You might ask yourself what my views and issues are that I would feel so horribly disenfranchised by both major political parties. What kind of nut-job am I? Well, these briefly are the views and issues for which I seek representation:

One, illegal immigration. I want you to stop coddling illegal immigrants and secure our borders. Close the underground tunnels. Stop the violence and the trafficking in drugs and people. No amnesty, not again. Been there, done that, no resolution. P.S., I’m not a racist. This is not to be confused with legal immigration.

Two, the STIMULUS bill. I want it repealed and I want no further funding supplied to it. We told you No, but you did it anyway. I want the remaining unfunded 95% repealed. Freeze, repeal.

Three, Czars. I want the circumvention of our constitutional checks and balances stopped immediately. Fire the czars. No more czars. Government officials answer to the process, not to the president. Stop trampling on our Constitution, and honor it.

Four, cap and trade. The debate on global warming is not over. There are many conflicting opinions and it is too soon for this radical legislation. Quit throwing our nation into politically-correct quicksand.

Five, universal healthcare. I will not be rushed into another expensive decision that will burden me, my children, and grandchildren. Don’t you dare try to pass this in the middle of the night without even reading it. Slow down!  Fix only what is broken — we have the best health care system in the world — and test any new program in one or two states first.

Six, growing government control. I want states rights and sovereignty fully restored. I want less government in my life, not more. More is not better! Shrink it down. Mind your own business.  You have enough to take care of with your real [Constitutional] obligations. Why don’t you start there.

Seven, ACORN. I do not want ACORN and its affiliates in charge of our 2010 census. I want them investigated. I also do not want mandatory escrow fees contributed to them every time on every real estate deal that closes — how did they pull that one off?  Stop the funding to ACORN and its affiliates pending impartial audits and investigations. I do not trust them with taking the census with our taxpayer money. I don’t trust them with any of our taxpayer money. Face up to the allegations against them and get it resolved before taxpayers get any more involved with them. If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, hello. Stop protecting your political buddies. You work for us, the people. Investigate.

Eight, redistribution of wealth. No, no, no. I work for my money. It is mine. I have always worked for people with more money than I have because they gave me jobs – and that is the only redistribution of wealth that I will support. I never got a job from a poor person! Why do you want me to hate my employers? And what do you have against shareholders making a profit?

Nine, charitable contributions. Although I never got a job from a poor person, I have helped many in need. Charity belongs in our local communities, where we know our needs best and can use our local talent and our local resources. Butt out, please. We want to do it ourselves.

Ten, corporate bailouts. Knock it off. Every company must sink or swim like the rest of us. If there are hard times ahead, we’ll be better off just getting into it and letting the strong survive. Quick and painful. (Have you ever ripped off a Band-Aid?) We will pull together. Great things happen in America under great hardship. Give us the chance to innovate. We cannot disappoint you more than you have disappointed us.

Eleven, transparency and accountability. How about it? No, really, how about it? Let’s have it. Let’s say we give the buzzwords a rest and have some straight honest talk. Please stop trying to manipulate and appease me with clever wording. I am not the idiot you obviously take me for. Stop sneaking around and meeting in back rooms making deals with your friends. It will only be a prelude to your criminal investigation. Stop hiding things from me.

Twelve, unprecedented quick spending. Stop it now.
Take a breath. Listen to the people. Slow down and get some input from nonpoliticians and experts on the subject. Stop making everything an emergency. Stop speed-reading our bills into law. I am not an activist. I am not a community organizer. Nor am I a terrorist, a militant or a violent person. I am a parent and a grandparent. I work. I’m busy.  I am busy, and I am tired. I thought we elected competent people to take care of the business of government so that we could work, raise our families, pay our bills, have a little recreation, complain about taxes, endure our hardships, pursue our personal goals, cut our lawn, wash our cars on the weekends and be responsible contributing members of society and teach our children to be the same all while living in the home of the free and land of the brave.

I entrusted you with upholding the Constitution. I believed in the checks and balances to keep from getting far off course. What happened? You are very far off course. Do you really think I find humor in the hiring of a speed reader to unintelligently ramble all through a bill that you signed into law without knowing what it contained? I do not. It is a mockery of the responsibility I have entrusted to you. It is a slap in the face. I am not laughing at your arrogance. Why is it that I feel as if you would not trust me to make a single decision about my own life and how I would live it but you should expect that I should trust you with the debt that you have laid on all of us and our children. We did not want the TARP bill. We said no. We would repeal it if we could. I am sure that we still cannot. There is needless urgency and recklessness in all of your recent spending of our tax dollars.

From my perspective, it seems that all of you have gone insane. I also know that I am far from alone in these feelings. Do you honestly feel that your current pursuits have merit to patriotic Americans? We want it to stop. We want to put the brakes on everything that is being rushed by us and forced upon us. We want our voice back. You have forced us to put our lives on hold to straighten out the mess that you are making. We will have to give up our vacations, our time spent with our children, any relaxation time we may have had and money we cannot afford to spend on bringing our concerns to Washington . Our president often knows all the right buzzwords like unsustainable. Well, no kidding. How many tens of thousands of dollars did the focus group cost to come up with that word? We don’t want your overpriced words. Stop treating us like we’re morons.

We want all of you to stop focusing on your reelection and do the job we want done, not the job you want done or the job your party wants done. You work for us and at this rate I guarantee you not for long because we are coming. We will be heard and we will be represented.. You think we’re so busy with our lives that we will never come for you? We are the formerly silent majority, all of us who quietly work, pay taxes, obey the law, vote, save money, keep our noses to the grindstone… and we are now looking at you.

You have awakened us, the patriotic freedom spirit so strong and so powerful that it had been sleeping too long. You have pushed us too far. Our numbers are great. They may surprise you. For every one of us who will be there, there will be hundreds more that could not come. Unlike you, we have their trust. We will represent them honestly, rest assured. They will be at the polls on voting day to usher you out of office.

We have canceled vacations. We will use our last few dollars saved. We will find the representation among us and a grassroots campaign will flourish. We didn’t ask for this fight. But the gloves are coming off. We do not come in violence, but we are angry. You will represent us or you will be replaced with someone who will. There are candidates among us who will rise like a Phoenix from the ashes that you have made of our constitution.

Democrat, Republican, Independent, Libertarian. Understand this. We don’t care. Political parties are meaningless to us. Patriotic Americans are willing to do right by us and our Constitution, and that is all that matters to us now. We are going to fire all of you who abuse power and seek more. It is not your power. It is ours and we want it back. We entrusted you with it and you abused it. You are dishonorable. You are dishonest. As Americans we are ashamed of you. You have brought shame to us. If you are not representing the wants and needs of your constituency loudly and consistently, in spite of the objections of your party, you will be fired. Did you hear? We no longer care about your political parties. You need to be loyal to us, not to them.. Because we will get you fired and they will not save you.

If you do or can represent me, my issues, my views, please stand up. Make your identity known. You need to make some noise about it. Speak up. I need to know who you are. If you do not speak up, you will be herded out with the rest of the sheep and we will replace the whole damn congress if need be one by one. We are coming. Are we coming for you? Who do you represent? What do you represent? Listen. Because we are coming. We the people are coming.“

Rarely has a political movement with so much power collapsed so fast, certainly not since the fall of the Berlin Wall.

Beginning in 1990, Global Warming has been the battle cry behind schemes for global control of industry, energy use, water use, private property and community development. It has been the excuse for economy-killing legislation like Cap and Trade (that will extract $865 billion from an already overtaxed people who use energy), and global-to-local polices like Sustainable Development (that robs local communities of freedom to decide their own future development). As a result, the world economy is being transformed into a new Dark Ages of superstition and thought-control – all in the name of Global Warming – or more recently – Climate Change.

No stone has been left unturned in Global Warming zealotry and its drive to transform human civilization. It seemed the juggernaut could not be stopped. Proponents have controlled every branch of government, from federal to local. They have created international policy, from the 1992 Global Climate Treaty, to the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, to the 15 annual meetings of the Climate Conference of the Parties (COP) with nearly 200 national delegations in attendance, and much more.

And of course, their fellow travelers in the media have deftly excluded any reports that may expose the Global Warming “consensus.” “Indisputable.” said Al Gore, as he won the Nobel Prize and the Oscar for his efforts to spread the gospel. “Go Green,” said nearly every corporation and school classroom. Barack Obama says firmly, “The science is settled.”

To enforce their agenda of top down control over the world economy based on Climate Change, the one factor they had to oversee with an iron hand was the science and how it was reported. They were well aware that any crack in public confidence of that science could mark their doom.

The cracks began to show just over two years ago as Senator James Inhofe took over chairmanship of the Senate Environment Committee. As he held hearings on the issue of Climate Change, for the first time those scientists whose research didn’t agree with official global reports were heard. It caused a sensation. Suddenly, the claims of consensus rang hollow. There was disagreement. There was debate. Truth began to leak through the cracks.

Over the following year the debate intensified. Those skeptical of the official findings of the UN’s Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) questioned the methods in which the conclusions were made that man was causing global warming and that temperatures were rising at an alarming rate. The skeptical scientists asked for documentation to show how the conclusions were made. They were not answered.

Meanwhile, the Global Warming proponents ramped up their attacks against anyone who dared question their statements. Skeptics were labeled as heretics who dared defy the “globally-acceptable truth” of the high priests of global warming. Some proponents actually called for “Nuremberg-style trials” of the skeptics, accusing them of endangering the entire planet simply for asking questions.

The attacks became official threats when, in October, 2006, two U.S. Senators, Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) and Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) sent a letter to ExxonMobil Chairman Rex Tillerson. The letter derided Exxon for helping to fund global warming “deniers,” (a term the global warming proponents use frequently to try and draw a parallel with those who deny the Holocaust). Said the letter, “we are convinced that ExxonMobil’s longstanding support of a small cadre of global climate change skeptics, and those skeptics’ access to and influence on government policymakers, have made it increasingly difficult for the United States to demonstrate the moral clarity it needs across all facets of diplomacy.”

The letter went on to say, “ExxonMobil and its partners in denial have manufactured controversy, sown doubt, and impeded progress with strategies all-too reminiscent of those used by the tobacco industry for so many years.” The reference to the tobacco industry was a not-so-veiled threat that Exxon could face the crush of government regulation that could destroy their ability to sell their product. But the intimidation didn’t stop there. The letter continued, “We recommend that ExxonMobil publicly acknowledge both the reality of climate change and the role of humans in causing or exacerbating it. Second, ExxonMobil should repudiate its climate change denial campaign…” The only thing the Senators left out were the words, “Science be damned.”

The last time human kind was strapped into such a mental straight jacket was during the Inquisition of the Dark Ages. The period was an era of ignorance, superstition, social chaos and repression. Anyone caught questioning the doctrine or power of the church was labeled a heretic and found his or her way to the rack or into the middle of a fire while tied to a stake. The church, of course, was practicing its own brand of “globally-acceptable truth.”

Still, the scientists came out against the global warming hysteria in ever- increasing numbers. Harvard scholar and climate scientist Willie Soon put it best saying “It’s the Sun, stupid.”

Dr. Mark Campbell, professor of chemistry at the U.S. Navel Academy in Annapolis recently wrote, “The sky is not burning, and to claim that it is amounts to journalistic malpractice.”

Said U.S. Government atmospheric scientist Stanley B, Goldenberg, “It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of scientists who don’t buy into anthropogenic global warming.”

In the past year, more than 700 scientists from around the world have expressed their doubts. That’s 12 times the number of UN IPCC global warming alarmists.

Top that with the fact that more than 34,000 American scientists have signed a petition saying there is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing disruption of the Earth’s climate.

To generally summarize the findings of those scientists who refuse to just go along with the Climate Change party line, their investigative research shows any warming actually stopped in 1999. And, in fact, they say the brief warming period we experienced in the past decade was completely natural, caused in part by storms on the sun, not CO2 emissions from SUVs. The sun storms have ended, say scientists, and now a cooling period has begun.

However, in spite of the growing evidence showing that the earth is not heating up, CO2 is not a pollutant, and man has not destroyed the earth, the drive to enforce draconian legislation has moved forward like an unstoppable express train. Cap and Trade passed the House of Representatives last fall and stands ready for approval any time in the Senate. The “Warm Mongers” have a gala event planned in Copenhagen where they intend to use climate change as an excuse to enforce global government. Local communities are enforcing legislation under Sustainable Development to control water use, land use, community development, even population control – again, all under the excuse of climate change; as the “go green” mantra grows ever more shrill in the complying media and in corporate advertising.

Unstoppable? Well, not so fast. Something interesting has happened to bring a real downer to the Climate Change party. It seems an adventurous hacker found his way into some very private e-mails – ten years worth of documents and correspondence – and suddenly things have changed.

The e-mails were in the files of the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia in England. And their importance to the Climate Change effort cannot be denied. The Unit’s director is Professor Phillip Jones, who is in charge of two key sets of data used by the IPCC to draw up its reports. The CRU has direct links to the Hadely Centre, part of Great Britain’s Met Office, which selects most of the IPCC’s key scientific contributors ( the scientists and their reports chosen for the final IPCC documents that affect climate change treaties and policy).

Professor Jones’ global temperature record is the most important of the four sets of temperature data on which the IPCC and governments rely. The predictions in the CRU reports have steadily predicted that the world will warm to catastrophic levels unless trillions of dollars are spent to avert it.

Professor Jones is also a key part of the closely knit group of American and British scientists responsible for promoting the picture of world temperatures conveyed in Michael Mann’s “hockey stick” graph which ten years ago turned climate science upside down by showing that, after 1,000 years of decline, global temperatures have recently shot up to their highest level in recorded history. It was that graph that started the stampede toward global warming hysteria.

So the correspondence to and from Professor Jones and his CRU is a window into the real thinking of the Climate Change community. That’s why the revelations from those e-mails have caused such a firestorm in the scientific and political community.

Just a few of the exposed e-mails reveal efforts to hide the fact that research was not supporting the global warming claims. Kevin Trenberth, of the U.S. National Center for Atmospheric Research wrote to Professor Jones, “We can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment, and it is as travesty that we can’t.” Professor Jones wrote that he had used a “trick” to “hide the decline” in a chart detailing recent global temperatures.

The correspondence clearly shows a pattern of intimidation to editors of scientific journals if they did not toe the line and keep out dissenting “skeptic” findings. In a particularly damning e-mail exchange from 2003, Michael Mann was alarmed when his “Hockey Stick” graph was discredited by research from another scientist. In the cited e-mail exchange, Mann and Jones discuss a scheme for getting rid of Hans Von Storch, the editor of the journal Climate Research for publishing the contrary research of distinguished fellow scientists.

Some of the e-mails appear to confirm concerns that Jones, Mann and others have destroyed data that could expose their fraudulent research methods. One e-mail shows Jones suggesting to Mann that he delete certain e-mails that apparently dealt with the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, released in 2007. He also suggests that one of their colleagues delete related materials. Jones refused to comply with a Freedom of Information request by saying in an e-mail, “I think I’ll delete the file rather than send (it) to anyone,” and “We also have a data protection act, which I will hide behind.”

Those raw documents show a pattern of deception, intimidation and fraud. In the words of respected scientist and skeptic Fred Singer, “The Climategate disclosures …, consisting of some thousands of e-mails between a small group of British and U.S. climate scientists, demonstrate that global warming is man-made after all – created by this small group of zealous scientists. They have used flawed data, phony statistics, and various tricks. They have covered up any contrary evidence and refused to open their work to the scrutiny of independent scholars. By keeping out intruders, by reviewing their own papers, by capturing scientific journals and intimidating editors, they have tried to suppress any dissent.”

In the short time since the disclosure of the documents, the sky has fallen in on the once seemingly invincible Climate Change juggernaut, prompting climatologist Dr. Patrick Michaels to exclaim, “This is not a smoking gun, it’s a mushroom cloud.”

As I have been reporting for more than fifteen years, Global Warming and Climate Change have never been about protecting the environment. It is the excuse used to subvert free markets, industry, private property ownership, local development and our standard of living into a nightmare of control and regulation. It has been a scheme from the beginning to impose global government.

In the name of environmental protection and a legitimate concern over the survival of the planet, Americans and others around the world have voluntarily surrendered their freedoms because they were told it was necessary to survive. They would never have given up those freedoms simply to promote an ideology like Marxism. Global Warming was invented to cover the real intent.

Now, the truth has been exposed in gory detail, like a horrible crash with entrails spilled across the road way. People are shocked and angry as the magnitude of the betrayal comes into focus. Recent polls now show 59% of the American people say they fully believe scientists “falsified research data to support their own beliefs about global warming.”

The perpetrators like Phillip Jones and Michael Mann and others are trying to downplay the disastrous revelations of the e-mails, saying they were stolen. That fact does not change their content. The White House says the revelations make no difference. Obama intends to move forward with Climate Change legislation anyway. They continue to keep up the party line that “everyone agrees” that Global Warming is a real threat, caused by humans.

These, of course, are efforts to maintain a unified front to save what once appeared to be inevitable. But the lawsuits for more information have already started against agencies like NASA, were researcher Christopher Horner believes he will find more evidence similar to the Jones scandal. The scandal will grow, revealing to the world the greatest deception in the history of governance.

The Copenhagen Conference is already in disarray, as some of the head rats prepare to abandon ship. Most notably, Al Gore almost immediately announced plans to cancel a lecture on Global Warming he was to give at the Copenhagen gathering. The news media, which has been the best friend of the scam and the worst enemy of free and independent news, now shows signs of scuttling their former partners in crime as they seek to rat them out in sensational stories about the developing scandal.

For the average American, now is the time to take action against these scoundrels who sought to enslave you. The leaders who most deserve your wrath at the polls are Barbara Boxer and Henry Waxman, who are determined to pass Cap and Trade, no matter what. In fact, Boxer’s reaction to Climategate is not to express outrage that Warm Mongers were using her to enforce their scheme to rob taxpayers out of trillions of dollars for bogus climate change regulations. Of course not. Boxer wants to hold hearings to look into the “illegal actions” that were taken in obtaining the e-mails! She shouted with grand indignity: “That is a crime!”

And of course there are Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi who are determined to help them do it. Their continued pursuit of “Climate Change” rules and regulations will show beyond doubt that their true agenda has nothing to do with helping the environment – but everything to do with granting government more and more power to enforce their will.

Don’t leave out Barack Obama, who told the September economic summit in Pittsburg, “Rising sea levels threaten every coastline. More powerful storms and floods threaten every continent. More frequent droughts and crop failures breed hunger and conflict already thrives. On shrinking islands, families are already being forced to flee their homes as climate refugees…the time we have to reverse this tide is running out.” Every word of this fear mongering is a lie and Barack Obama remains fully prepared to enforce global policy in its name that will destroy your freedom and way of life.

Finally, now is the time to demand that state and local government officials roll back the policies of Sustainable Development and run the international organizations like ICLEI out of town. Controls on water, air, local development, curtailment of industry, regulations on what property owners can do with their own land, taxes on energy use, and much more have been put in place under the fear mongering of carbon emissions and global warming. The facts now reveal that all of this was a lie. That makes laws created in its name illegitimate and therefore void. Vote out any city council members of county commissioners who refuse to do it.

It is astonishing that the mighty force of Climate Change has fallen so hard – so fast. But it is a gift we must not waste. Now is the time for all lovers of freedom to rise up, throw the scoundrels out, throw off our “climate chains of tyranny” and take back our American freedoms.