----- Original Message -----
From: ...

Originally from: "brent ns" <...>
To: <...>
Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2003 9:34 AM
Subject: Re: [farmtalking] Petition to include animal protection in EU Constitution

Mona..

My appologies.. I write very directly.. and my intention was not to attack
you personally.. But to skewer the idea...

I hadn't paid attention.. if it had been suggested before..

It's a terrible idea to get anything related to Animals like that in a
constitution..for all the reasons I've stated..
It will hand, game set and match to the AR radicals.. It is exactly what
they want..Rights for animals.. And AR really means dehumanizing humans

We're gonna lose most domestic animals eventually.... It won't happen

right

away.. but that's clearly the course.. The AR agenda i consider just

part

of the government sanctioned social engineering effort. AR radicals

believe

owning domestic animals is slavery and putting anti-human, animal rights

in

a constitution greatly advances the agenda..
It will guarantee that we lose animals all the sooner..
And it doesn't matter if one thinks one is only putting "welfare" issues

in

the constitution..because they'll keep chipping away "redefining"
"welfare".. they'll say..surely keeping animals in slavery cannot

constitute

good welfare after all..
Notice that quote and what she stands for..That straight AR radical stuff.

The problems of FMD have been with your own government.. And were not
constitutional issues. The problems of an out of control government are

not

solved .. by having a bigger government , for example the EU..with a type

of

constitution that even further limits liberty, in fact doesn't recognize
"natural" rights..

If they really wanted to fix the problem, and i suggested this earlier..

The

UK gov should have allowed each farmer to decide for themselves whether to
vaccinate.. That would've been a lot more empowering.. and they could've
done it this time..
Nothing to do with a constitution.. In fact.. If Ben Gill hadn't been such
an obstacle to vaccination.. and had he been in favor.. the government
couldn't have used (however inappropriately) his position as an excuse..
And was the NFU a legitimate representative of UK farmers anyway??
What real right did Gill have to speak for individual farmers??
Maybe a best approach in retrospect would've been for farmers to rise in
anger and impeach Ben Gill..

Think of it this way.. if your local county or council or whatever.. were

a

sovereign country..you would have much more direct input.. into issues..

The

bigger the government,the less input you have..

For now.. the EU seemed like the good cop (wrt FMD).. to the UK government
bad cop.. However.. as i recall, our good friend Chris Booker or Richard
North.. revealed that actually the EU was already responsible for ensuring
the UK had an up to date emergency policy.. So in that event . they had
responsibility and let us down badly..

Part of the process, that they are trying to use,is to "validate" the EU

in

the UK citizens eyes..So the EU investigation offered a sympathetic
ear..(but no tangible action)wrt FMD..

But later.. if the UK succumbs fully to the EU.. You will be faced with an
even worse problem with less input..

And the proof of that is all the countless other EU regs.. . that the UK
gov.. even now, insists they have to impose.. to comply with EU
requirements...

A more distant.. and less accountable government is not what you want..
I know how sorely tempting it may seem at this stage.. to grasp for
"salvation" to a "higher authority" when your own government has abused

you

so badly..But it's the wrong thing to do.

The real solution is to hold the UK government/others to account..
If we cannot easily do that.. Think how much harder it will be in the

future

to hold the fascist/soviet EU to account..

All the issues you cite are welfare issues.. Those that occur outside the
UK.. have nothing to do with the UK.. except as they affect conditions of
trade..

Allowing the freedom to be different.. is exactly the advantage of having
separate countries.. being anti-EU is being Pro-European..as far as I'm
concerned..

There is no reason to want one constitution.. in the first place.. but if
other countries in Europe wanted a better system than their own.. surely
they are free to adopt the Anglo-Saxon model.. It's by far the best system
we had so far to guarantee "individual" freedom

But in any event, one should not put any animal issue within a
constitution..for the reasons I've given..

Here's the process they use on us to try to condition us to implement the
change they want..
Hegelian Principle
http://www.learn-usa.com/er011.htm

Government created the problem.. and their Synthesis in this case, is to
greatly increase government power and control.. (like the AHB).. sigh..

And

to hand over more power to Brussels..

And that's also what suggestion wrt the EU constitution would do..only
worse..

Getting people to look to the EU for "validation".. would be one of the
desired outcomes of the gov bungling of FMD.. And putting AR in a proposed
EU constition would be an desired outcome of the AR's..

But wouldn't it just be simpler.. and more freedom to just let farmers
decide for themselves whether or not to vaccinate.
If you don't and you lose your animals.no compensation.. free to choose

and

easy to implement.. and we could've done it this time..

No constitutional amendment is needed or desireable..Very much the

opposite

for the reasons I've given

When government is the problem.. bigger government isn't the solution..
Less government, and accountable government is.. (if we can only get it)

All the Best
brent

From: ...
Reply-To: ...
To: ...
Subject: [farmtalking] Petition to include animal protection in EU
Constitution
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 07:36:20 EDT

I put this forward for consideration as during FMD animals and their

owners

lost any 'rights' they thought they had.

It was a shock to all the good folks who were hurt by the action of this
government.. I know..

I certainly thought at the start that my animals were safe as long as

they

stayed healthy--not so.

I'm sorry that it occurred..

Some EU countries had access to vaccination--why not all.

As above.. nothing precluded the UK government from vaccination.. they

were

allowed to as i understand.. They just decided that they didn't want to

and

gave various excuses..
For the UK government to claim it was just a bit of muddle.. just could
never wash for me..After all, they took decisions.. What are they supposed
to claim.. that the decisions they in fact took were inadvertant?? Of

course

not.. that's ridiculous..
I cannot overlook, that cutting back farming in the UK was in accordance
with their long term goals... But the way they did it, abusing people

so..

was just abhorent to me..

If vaccination to live, was written in the Constitution would we not all
sleep easier.

I know .. but you will never get such a narrow definition in a
constitution.. And putting any "animal" related issues in an EU

constitution

will simply guarantee that the AR radicals agenda is implemented.. and
sooner than otherwise.. It will greatly empower the AR's.. and disempower
animal owners.. That would be the result..

Why are we hauling live slaughter animals hundreds of miles (up to 1500
miles) to their deaths?

Didn't EU regs gold plated by London do this?? vet inspections etc hurt

cost

structure of small abbatoirs

The plight of horses from Eastern Europe travelling to Italy without
partitions still goes on despite the work of charities like ILPH and

VIVA.

This would be a welfare issue..

I'm not familiar with ILPH.. But remember, just as you may feel this

doesn't

meet good welfare standards, and i may agree.. AR feel that ownership of
animals is slavery.. So if you want to legislatee.. be aware that there

are

others who want to legislate all ownership of animals away from you..And
will do so if given an opening..

I briefly looked at the Viva site.. Viva IMO, is an AR/Eco organization
although they don't acknowledge it.. They are trying to link vegetarianism
to AR.. But i was vegetarian for a short time.. and never would have
proseletysed AR.. I was not veg because of concern for animals but because

i

thought at the time it was a healthier choice..
I'm strongly in favour of what i consider, good animal welfare, for the
record..

Why is Halal slaughter allowed?

Freedom of religion for now.. but i would expect this to come under

pressure

eventually

Why when cruelty cases are proven in the court do magistrates sometimes
allow
the animals to be returned to the owner?

i cannot comment .. i don't know any details..

Horses have been dying this spring of EHV 1 the paralytic form of equine
herpes--not a notifiable disease so DEFRA has given no advice, no
recommendations, no travel restrictions, no help in tracing how it has
spread. A number of livery stables and horse owners have had weeks of
worry--although perhaps relieved that DEFRA did not come in and recommend
culling to prevent further spread.

I understand the concern..and sad to say i think they are not unjustified
in being worried about the political aspects..
I tried to warn of some of my concerns previously..
http://www.warmwell.com/brentmar15.html

The gov wouldn't have implemented the AHB.. unless they were going to use
it..At some point i'm sure they will..
Whether they would in this case i've no idea..

I've no knowledge at all about the disease.. It does sound like something
for which tracing and travel restriction would help..
However this could be handled in a traditional disease management system..
if Defra could be trusted to act ethically.. as we decent folks understand
the term.. But we know they, and this governemnt cannot be trusted..
Unfortunately.. this still cannot be remedied, to look to the EU for

hope..

What really needs to happen is to hold the miscreants to account..

The way a country treats its animals and children is a reflection on its
people.
Many children saw the full horrors of FMD and lost their pets, I wonder

at

the effect on them in years to come.

Yes.. it's a valid concern.. the government was brutal..

We have seen what happens when one country allows a treatment/euthanasia
and
another doesnt--people of determination just move countries.

The intent of all the new so called "bio-ethical" and other values.. is

that

they eventually be mandated everywhere..(they will replace for example the
Christian based values of the west)..
So if you want the freedom to differ from some of these new values.. and
want to be able to live in a society with your own values.. You've just
pointed out exactly why it's a good idea to fight to retain sovereignty..
For example.. If the utilitarian Singer gets his way.. selling children

for

body parts could well be condoned.. Singer calls himself an utilitarian..
and that's an example of his thinking.. commodifying , "dehumanizing"
humans..

Is it so wrong

to have basic legislation Europe wide.

If that would force everyone to conform to the same values, contrary to

the

deeply held beliefs of some.. I would say yes.
For instance , why would anyone in the UK want to give up their form of
government which has been the best guarantee of individual freedom, and
adopt the Collectivist models..which have a consistent record of failure
The bigger the grouping of people, the more likely you will have large
minorities permanently disaffected from federal power..That is not

healthy..

For example..right now, even in the UK, there's a major propanganda

campaign

demonizing farmers, animal owners and the countryside.. Has this been
healthy?? Why does the Countryside Alliance exist??.. because people are
disaffected from, and being disenfranchised by, the power center.. The
bigger the federal state.. the worse the alienation from the center.. and
the more likely one will have a draconian police state to keep "order"..
You're also assuming that you get laws.. with which YOU concur.. that's

not

a good assumption.. The AR's don't agree with owning animals for
instance..and they will win if one gives them the legislation with which
they can bludgeon you..

The Utopian dreams turn sour when confronted with reality.. Russia had

lots

of major ethnic groups.. crammed together for a long time under their
utopian Soviet..
Someday Turkey wants to be an EU member.. And i think the EU is working
preparatory deals for North Africa.. and Egypt and possibly a good part of
the Middle East eventually..
Can all these people be happy with for example Dutch Liberal values..
Were the Dutch happy with Muslim values.. Seems not judging by the rise
of Pim Fortuyn's party.. The Fellow who was unfortuneately murdered..

I believe that all of mankind should share some core values.. but i would
keep it to very few..
I'm not in favour of enforcing a comprehensive set of global values on
everyone.. a la agenda 21, one world (pagan) religion etc
They talk about tolerance and diversity, but seek to eliminate it..

Mona

--
If you want to share pictures, use the calendar, or start a vote
visit http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/farmtalking

To leave the group, email: ...

_____________________________________________________________
MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus

--
If you want to share pictures, use the calendar, or start a vote
visit http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/farmtalking

To leave the group, email: ...