Further, the rule warned, "If any soldier comes into possession
of a Privately Owned Weapon following the effective date of this
memorandum, he is required to inform the Chain of Command of the
above information."
One soldier who objected to the demands circulated the memo,
commenting that he lives off post.
"It just seems a little coincidental to me that within 90
days the most anti-firearm president in history is inaugurated,
some of the nastiest anti-firearm laws are put on the table in
Washington, and then the Army comes around wanting what amounts
to a registration on all firearms, even if they are off post,
and doesn't provide any reason or purpose as to why," the
soldier said.
Further, the rule warned, "If any soldier comes into
possession of a Privately Owned Weapon following the
effective date of this memorandum, he is required to
inform the Chain of Command of the above
information."
One soldier who objected to the demands
circulated the memo, commenting that he lives off
post.
"It just seems a little coincidental to me that
within 90 days the most anti-firearm president in
history is inaugurated, some of the nastiest
anti-firearm laws are put on the table in
Washington, and then the Army comes around wanting
what amounts to a registration on all firearms, even
if they are off post, and doesn't provide any reason
or purpose as to why," the soldier said.
Further, the rule warned, "If any soldier comes into
possession of a Privately Owned Weapon following the
effective date of this memorandum, he is required to
inform the Chain of Command of the above
information."
One soldier who objected to the demands
circulated the memo, commenting that he lives off
post.
"It just seems a little coincidental to me that
within 90 days the most anti-firearm president in
history is inaugurated, some of the nastiest
anti-firearm laws are put on the table in
Washington, and then the Army comes around wanting
what amounts to a registration on all firearms, even
if they are off post, and doesn't provide any reason
or purpose as to why," the soldier said.
A military commander
at
Fort Campbell in Kentucky demanded his
soldiers give
him the registration numbers of any guns they own
privately and then reveal where they are stored.
The order was stopped,
according to
base officials, when it was discovered the commander
was not "acting within his authority."
The original order was issued on the letterhead
of Charlie Company, 3rd Battalion, 187th Infantry
Regiment and said effective March 11, any soldier
with a "privately owned weapon" was required to
submit the
information, along with any information about
any concealed carry permit the soldier may have, and
what state issued the permit.
(Story continues below)
Further, the rule warned, "If any soldier comes
into possession of a Privately Owned Weapon
following the effective date of this memorandum, he
is required to inform the Chain of Command of the
above information."
One soldier who objected to the demands
circulated the memo, commenting that he lives off
post.
"It just seems a little coincidental to me that
within 90 days the most anti-firearm president in
history is inaugurated, some of the nastiest
anti-firearm laws are put on the table in
Washington, and then the Army comes around wanting
what amounts to a registration on all firearms, even
if they are off post, and doesn't provide any reason
or purpose as to why," the soldier said.
Base spokeswoman Cathy Gramling told WND the
letter apparently was a mistake. She said the base
requires anyone bringing a privately owned weapon
onto the installation to register it.
"As a response to a number of negligent
discharges of privately owned weapons, the command
decided to explore how to implement a
training
program for soldiers with privately owned weapons.
Their goal is to identify soldiers with firearms and
provide additional safety training to them, much
like our motorcycle and driver safety classes," she
said.
"Our soldiers train and operate in combat with
M-4 carbines and various other military weapons, but
not all who purchase their own weapons are properly
trained to handle them. Determining which soldiers
possess weapons will allow the command to identify
the soldiers who may require additional training on
them," she said.
Gramling said the memo was "from a subordinate
unit commander who, at the time, believed he was
acting within his authority." She said requiring the
information was halted when it was discovered the
commander was not within his authority.
The process has been suspended pending a full
review, she said.
"This is not an effort to infringe on soldiers'
rights to own firearms," Gramling told WND.
That policy already had been implemented and had
taken a bite out of the nation's stressed ammunition
supply before it was reversed this week.
Mark Cunningham, a legislative affairs
representative with the Defense Logistics Agency,
explained in an e-mail to the office of Sen. Jon
Tester, D-Mont., that the Department of Defense
had placed small arms cartridge cases on its list of
sensitive munitions items as part of an overall
effort to ensure
national security is not jeopardized in the
sale of any Defense property.
"Upon review, the Defense Logistics Agency has
determined the cartridge cases could be
appropriately placed in a category of government
property allowing for their release for sale,"
Cunningham wrote.
A military commander
at
Fort Campbell in Kentucky demanded his
soldiers give
him the registration numbers of any guns they own
privately and then reveal where they are stored.
The order was stopped,
according to
base officials, when it was discovered the commander
was not "acting within his authority."
The original order was issued on the letterhead
of Charlie Company, 3rd Battalion, 187th Infantry
Regiment and said effective March 11, any soldier
with a "privately owned weapon" was required to
submit the
information, along with any information about
any concealed carry permit the soldier may have, and
what state issued the permit.
(Story continues below)
Further, the rule warned, "If any soldier comes
into possession of a Privately Owned Weapon
following the effective date of this memorandum, he
is required to inform the Chain of Command of the
above information."
One soldier who objected to the demands
circulated the memo, commenting that he lives off
post.
"It just seems a little coincidental to me that
within 90 days the most anti-firearm president in
history is inaugurated, some of the nastiest
anti-firearm laws are put on the table in
Washington, and then the Army comes around wanting
what amounts to a registration on all firearms, even
if they are off post, and doesn't provide any reason
or purpose as to why," the soldier said.
Base spokeswoman Cathy Gramling told WND the
letter apparently was a mistake. She said the base
requires anyone bringing a privately owned weapon
onto the installation to register it.
"As a response to a number of negligent
discharges of privately owned weapons, the command
decided to explore how to implement a
training
program for soldiers with privately owned weapons.
Their goal is to identify soldiers with firearms and
provide additional safety training to them, much
like our motorcycle and driver safety classes," she
said.
"Our soldiers train and operate in combat with
M-4 carbines and various other military weapons, but
not all who purchase their own weapons are properly
trained to handle them. Determining which soldiers
possess weapons will allow the command to identify
the soldiers who may require additional training on
them," she said.
Gramling said the memo was "from a subordinate
unit commander who, at the time, believed he was
acting within his authority." She said requiring the
information was halted when it was discovered the
commander was not within his authority.
The process has been suspended pending a full
review, she said.
"This is not an effort to infringe on soldiers'
rights to own firearms," Gramling told WND.
That policy already had been implemented and had
taken a bite out of the nation's stressed ammunition
supply before it was reversed this week.
Mark Cunningham, a legislative affairs
representative with the Defense Logistics Agency,
explained in an e-mail to the office of Sen. Jon
Tester, D-Mont., that the Department of Defense
had placed small arms cartridge cases on its list of
sensitive munitions items as part of an overall
effort to ensure
national security is not jeopardized in the
sale of any Defense property.
"Upon review, the Defense Logistics Agency has
determined the cartridge cases could be
appropriately placed in a category of government
property allowing for their release for sale,"
Cunningham wrote.
A military
commander at
Fort Campbell in Kentucky demanded his
soldiers
give him the registration numbers of any guns
they own privately and then reveal where they
are stored.
The order was stopped,
according
to base officials, when it was discovered the
commander was not "acting within his authority."
The original order was issued on the
letterhead of Charlie Company, 3rd Battalion,
187th Infantry Regiment and said effective March
11, any soldier with a "privately owned weapon"
was required to submit the
information,
along with any information about any concealed
carry permit the soldier may have, and what
state issued the permit.
(Story continues below)
Further, the rule warned, "If any soldier
comes into possession of a Privately Owned
Weapon following the effective date of this
memorandum, he is required to inform the Chain
of Command of the above information."
One soldier who objected to the demands
circulated the memo, commenting that he lives
off post.
"It just seems a little coincidental to me
that within 90 days the most anti-firearm
president in history is inaugurated, some of the
nastiest anti-firearm laws are put on the table
in Washington, and then the Army comes around
wanting what amounts to a registration on all
firearms, even if they are off post, and doesn't
provide any reason or purpose as to why," the
soldier said.
Base spokeswoman Cathy Gramling told WND the
letter apparently was a mistake. She said the
base requires anyone bringing a privately owned
weapon onto the installation to register it.
"As a response to a number of negligent
discharges of privately owned weapons, the
command decided to explore how to implement a
training
program for soldiers with privately owned
weapons. Their goal is to identify soldiers with
firearms and provide additional safety training
to them, much like our motorcycle and driver
safety classes," she said.
"Our soldiers train and operate in combat
with M-4 carbines and various other military
weapons, but not all who purchase their own
weapons are properly trained to handle them.
Determining which soldiers possess weapons will
allow the command to identify the soldiers who
may require additional training on them," she
said.
Gramling said the memo was "from a
subordinate unit commander who, at the time,
believed he was acting within his authority."
She said requiring the information was halted
when it was discovered the commander was not
within his authority.
The process has been suspended pending a full
review, she said.
"This is not an effort to infringe on
soldiers' rights to own firearms," Gramling told
WND.
That policy already had been implemented and
had taken a bite out of the nation's stressed
ammunition supply before it was reversed this
week.
Mark Cunningham, a legislative affairs
representative with the Defense Logistics
Agency,
explained in an e-mail to the office of Sen. Jon
Tester, D-Mont., that the Department of
Defense had placed small arms cartridge cases on
its list of sensitive munitions items as part of
an overall effort to ensure
national
security is not jeopardized in the sale of any
Defense property.
"Upon review, the Defense Logistics Agency
has determined the cartridge cases could be
appropriately placed in a category of government
property allowing for their release for sale,"
Cunningham wrote.
South African farmers suffered
millions of dollars in lost income when 82,000 hectares
of genetically-manipulated corn (maize) failed to
produce hardly any seeds. The plants look lush and
healthy from the outside. Monsanto has offered
compensation.
Monsanto blames the failure of the
three varieties of corn planted on these farms, in three
South African provinces, on alleged 'under fertilization
processes in the laboratory". Some 280 of the 1,000
farmers who planted the three varieties of Monsanto corn
this year, have reported extensive seedless corn
problems.
Urgent investigation demanded
However environmental activist Marian
Mayet, director of the Africa-centre for bio-security in
Johannesburg, demands an urgent government investigation
and an immediate ban on all GM-foods, blaming the crop
failure on Monsanto's genetically-manipulated
technology.
Willem Pelser, journalist of the
Afrikaans Sunday paper Rapport, writes from Nelspruit
that
Monsanto has immediately offered the farmers
compensation in three provinces - North West, Free State
and Mpumalanga. The damage-estimates are being
undertaken right now by the local farmers' cooperative,
Grain-SA. Monsanto claims that 'less than 25%' of three
different corn varieties were 'insufficiently fertilized
in the laboratory'.
80% crop failure
However Mayet says Monsanto was
grossly understating the problem. According to her own
information, some farms have suffered up to 80% crop
failures. The centre is strongly opposed to GM-food and
biologically-manipulated technology in general.
"Monsanto says they just made a
mistake in the laboratory, however we say that
biotechnology is a failure.You cannot make a 'mistake'
with three different varieties of corn.'
Demands urgent government
investigation:
"We have been warning against
GM-technology for years, we have been warning Monsanto
that there will be problems,' said Mayet. She calls for
an urgent government investigation and an immediate ban
on all GM-foods in South Africa.
Of the 1,000 South African farmers
who planted Monsanto's GM-maize this year, 280 suffered
extensive crop failure, writes Rapport.
Monsanto's local spokeswoman Magda du
Toit said the 'company is engaged in establishing the
exact extent of the damage on the farms'. She did not
want to speculate on the extent of the financial losses
suffered right now.
Managing director of Monsanto in
Africa, Kobus Lindeque, said however that 'less than 25%
of the Monsanto-seeded farms are involved in the loss'.
He says there will be 'a review of the seed-production
methods of the three varieties involved in the failure,
and we will made the necessary adjustments.'
He denied that the problem was caused
in any way by 'bio-technology'. Instead, there had been
'insufficient fertilization during the seed-production
process'.
And Grain-SA's Nico Hawkins says they
'are still support GM-technology; 'We will support any
technology which will improve production.'
see
He also they were 'satisfied with
Monsanto's handling of the case,' and said Grain-SA was
'closely involved in the claims-adjustment methodology'
between the farmers and Monsanto.
Farmers told Rapport that Monsanto
was 'bending over backwards to try and accommodate them
in solving the problem.
"It's a very good gesture to
immediately offer to compensate the farmers for losses
they suffered,' said Kobus van Coller, one of the Free
State farmers who discovered that his maize cobs were
practically seedless this week.
"One can't see from the outside
whether a plant is unseeded. One must open up the cob
leaves to establish the problem,' he said. The seedless
cobs show no sign of disease or any kind of fungus. They
just have very few seeds, often none at all.
The South African supermarket-chain
Woolworths already banned GM-foods from its shelves in
2000. However South African farmers have been producing
GM-corn for years: they were among the first countries
other than the United States to start using the Monsanto
products.
The South African government does not
require any labelling of GM-foods. Corn is the main
staple food for South Africa's 48-million people.
The three maize varieties which
failed to produce seeds were designed with a built-in
resistance to weed-killers, and manipulated to increase
yields per hectare, Rapport
writes.
