Private farm-self sustained living

This is a private farm. I live here and work the land, planting, tending and harvesting for my own benefit. This is how I eat. I grow grain crops to feed the animals I raise here, most are born right here on the farm. Some years are not as good as others(this one for instance) but the good years crops held in reserve help me make it thru the bad years.

One of the major things I do to keep my gardens going is to catch rain water. The rain water is free and it's so much better for the garden than "treated and chlorinated" water you have to pay for.

I grow my food without pesticides and without chemical fertilizers. My animals are antibiotic and steroid free. How much healthier and ecologically friendly can you get?

Nothing gets in my craw more than my own government telling me I am incapable of handling nature properly. Incapable of providing myself healthy, disease free food. So, people we've voted into office that have never owned a single cow or any other livestock, never grown a garden or eaten anything that didn't come from a store, think they know better than I do what's "good for me". So, you say "Kat, what are you talking about?" Read this little tidbit and it will become more clear....

Clean Water Restoration Act, Food safety bills

For example, the Clean Water Restoration Act (S.787) now before congress would give the feds control of all water (including rainwater) in the United States; its purpose being to skirt two solid Supreme Court rulings that told the feds they had regulatory jurisdictional only over the navigable waters of the U.S.--the way congress intended the initial Clean Water Act to work, and through which the U.S. agriculture and environmental communities have worked comfortably over the last 30 years.

What other words besides regulatory enslavement describe NAIS-imposed controls on ranchers, farmers, and livestock owners that define work they must perform and computer entries they must record daily under threat of penalties as high as $500,000 and ten years in prison for mere infractions?

USDA lists 33 NAIS ‘species’ for possible disease communication like TB (of which people are major carriers) that must be tracked under a WTO NAIS system. If the original NAIS program is killed by congress, then the tracking of these livestock can easily be folded into the “food safety” bills now working their way through congress.

American ranchers and farmers have heard the ‘white-shirted’ USDA posturings on “. . .safe food, traceability, world trade, and pandemic fears. . ."--flawed issues all in desperate need of factual debate, promised transparency, and rejection; that reek of regulatory enslavement for every independent family farm, ranch, and livestock operation in America.

NAIS wording and other stringent regulatory proposals are also camouflaged in H.R. 875--Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009, H.R.759 --Food and Drug Administration Globalization Act of 2009, H.R.. 814 --Tracing and Recalling Contamination Act of 2009, H.R. 1332-- Safe FEAST Act of 2009, S.425-- Food Safety and Tracking Improvement Act, and S. 510--Food Safety and Modernization Act.

Of these bills, H.R. 814 with broad government code words like “non-specific” “all foods” “transport of all foods” holds the most potential for a like-it-or-not revival of NAIS.

If passed, these bills will straight-jacket America’s farmers, ranchers, and livestock owners; threatening their lives and all they hold dear with fines and imprisonment if they do not obey; forcing them to become 21^st century sharecroppers on their own land.

So, while the rest of the country is wrapped up with the "cap & trade","national health care" and "mandatory swine flu vaccinations" stupidity, the evil that is congress is end running your food supply.

It seems to me that the Dept of Homeland Security needs to re-evaluate their definition of "domestic terrorist". It is apparent to me that Congress is full of the only terrorists I'm worried about..........

NO, I WILL NOT COMPLY, PERIOD!

Cooper Vs. Terrorism

I felt this was appropriate for today... written by Col. Jeff Cooper in the 1975 Guns & Ammo Annual.

Cooper VS. Terrorism
by Jeff Cooper

So here we are in the "Age of Extortion." Our local friendly felons have finally discovered what has long been taken for granted in what we used to call "more backward countries"—that crime does pay—in millions. All you need to do is threaten to do something terrible and people will throw money at you. You don't need any particular talent or skill to get rich this way, and you don't need education or training. The only requisite is nastiness, and that is no rare quality.

We can speculate at length upon why this foulness has come upon us so strikingly at this point in our history, but I doubt that any incontrovertible conclusion will result. My own suggestion is simply overpopulation. Like rats, we get testier as we get crowded. By simple arithmetic, if the proportion of goblins to people in our society remains constant, doubling our population doubles the number of goblins. And they reinforce each other as their numbers rise.

But such speculation is academic. We have the problem; never mind why. What shall we do about it? In a socialist atmosphere, the immediate response is to hand the problem to the state. Pass a law! Any law. Just so you can say that something has been done. And above all, spend money. We have come to assume that the more money we spend on a problem, the quicker it will go away.

Now it is quite true that the state can indeed abolish extortion, terrorism, and crime. History offers many examples of nations in which none of these things existed. We can start with Senacherib of Assyria and browse on up to Porfirio Diaz of Mexico. An iron fist will do it. That's the state's simple and effective answer to disorderly conduct. If you want it arranged so that the state will protect you, you can do so. What you give up in return is your liberty.

No deal.

The man to protect you is you. Not the state, not the agent of the state, and not your hired hand—YOU!

How often is our intelligence insulted by the fatuous claim that we should rely on the police for our physical security! I cannot believe that the people who advance this idea believe it themselves. The police do indeed abort a certain amount of violent crime by their coincidental presence on the scene, and that's fine. But to tell us that all we have to do is call a cop when confronted by a troll is to talk like a fool—and those who tell us this know it.

The "in" crime today is kidnapping. The police have never prevented a kidnapping. Not once. On the other hand, the intended victim often has. You don't hear much about these latter episodes, because a crime that does not take place is not newsworthy, but it is my business to know about such things and I keep track of them as best I may, and there have been at least a dozen instances brought to my attention in the last two years.

Hiring other people, public or private, to protect yourself, is perhaps not totally futile, but it must never be considered more than marginally effective. Both policemen and bodyguards can be suborned, and skill levels are problematical.

Pistol skill is not something to count on in a hired hand. Two recent examples stand out because they were caught by television cameras. These were the attempts on Governor Wallace and Imelda Marcos. In each case, guards were plentiful, and armed, but not sufficiently skilled. In each case, there was plenty of time to hit the attacker before he acted, but those responsible reacted only afterward.

On the other hand, the intended victim can seek his own skill level, and he can put it to use more quickly than any other person when he suddenly finds that he himself is a target.

Your best protector is you!

Apart from the skill factor, there is the matter of reliability. A man you hire to protect you can be hired by somebody else not to. It is nerve-wracking to be dogged about by armed men on your daily rounds, and it is also both conspicuous and un-private.

Some years ago, I undertook to train the personal guard of a certain chief of state in pistolcraft. When the course was completed, I was able to address my client thus:

"Your Excellency, 24 of your 28 men are now distinctly more efficient with their sidearms than the generality of those who guard the President of the United States. They are very good, but I don't know who they are—I hope you do."

He knew what I meant. One of his predecessors in office had been murdered by one of his own guards. Of my students who previously employed bodyguards, most now do not, except as car watchers.

Your best protector is you!

Still we hear, over and over again, that we should not be armed, that we should not resist, that we should rely on the police for our personal safety—that our best answer to violence is to give up. Such drivel demands a stronger stomach than mine.

One bleeding-heart type asked me in a recent interview if I did not agree that "violence begets violence." I told him that it is my earnest endeavor to see that it does. I would like very much to ensure—and in some cases I have—that any man who offers violence to his fellow citizen begets a whole lot more in return than he can enjoy.

Your best protector is you! The obvious way to eradicate crime is to eradicate criminals, but neither the lawgivers nor the constabulary seem inclined to do this. The man who elects to prey upon society deserves no consideration from society. If he survives his act of violence, he rates a fair trial—but only to be sure that there has been no mistake about his identity. If he is killed in the act, there can be little doubt about whose act it was.

But we don't want a "Porfiriato," in which the police simply shoot all suspects out of hand. Such a regime may indeed have a certain austere appeal in today's climate of urban chaos, but to trade one's liberty for security is to sell one's soul to the devil, as Ben Franklin noted. And, to quote James Burnham, it is both our lives and our liberties that are at stake.

Laws are not the answer. We have laws against murder. We have laws against kidnapping. We have laws against extortion. And murder, kidnapping, and extortion are on the rise. The answer, it seems to me, is wrath. Let the thug take his chances with an alert, prepared, and angry citizenry. It may very well spoil his whole career.

This is not a call for vigilantism: It is a call for self-reliance. For those who feel short on self-reliance, I have a suggestion. Take up practical pistol shooting as a recreation. It is a good game. It is fun. It is "relevant." And it does wonders for your self-reliance.

Your best protector is—as it always has been—you!

---

For more from Col. Jeff Cooper, visit FR Frogs pages, there's a link on my sidebar. This page is located here-


Stay safe and keep prepping!