It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Feds Stop Amish From Selling Milk

page: 5
41
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 01:06 AM
link   
Yet mONSANTO flourishes on.




posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 01:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by nixie_nox
Whether you like it or not, there are standards when it comes to selling food. If the facility wasn't meeting compliance, then someone can get really sick.
Just because it used to be unpasteurized, doesn't mean that people are used to unpasteurized now. Not having the bacteria in teh system shocked it.
Milking a cow and throwing it in a bottle may seem quaint. But there are sanitazation protocols, and you dont want someone giving bacteria filled milk to an infant.

Bacteria in the milk is a good thing and it helps your bodies immune system. I suppose you would rather drink milk riddled with growth hormones and god knows what other chemicals farmers are forced to put in there.

This is point blank the government trying to force their crap down our throats and say it's best for us. The more government gets involved the worse things get. This I am sure you have a problem with, so if you believe that government actually helps when it gets involved then show me proof!



posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 02:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by IncognitoGhostman

Originally posted by nixie_nox
Whether you like it or not, there are standards when it comes to selling food. If the facility wasn't meeting compliance, then someone can get really sick.
Just because it used to be unpasteurized, doesn't mean that people are used to unpasteurized now. Not having the bacteria in teh system shocked it.
Milking a cow and throwing it in a bottle may seem quaint. But there are sanitazation protocols, and you dont want someone giving bacteria filled milk to an infant.

Bacteria in the milk is a good thing and it helps your bodies immune system. I suppose you would rather drink milk riddled with growth hormones and god knows what other chemicals farmers are forced to put in there.

This is point blank the government trying to force their crap down our throats and say it's best for us. The more government gets involved the worse things get. This I am sure you have a problem with, so if you believe that government actually helps when it gets involved then show me proof!


Let me clarify a few things here. I grew up on unpasteurized milk and I never once got sick from it, but then the cows that it came from lived on our farm, so we knew the state of health of the animals and the potential risks we were taking. As per my previous post, I believe that through controlled animal health and good hygiene upasteurized milk can be safe. However, for a city dweller who has never seen, let alone cares about the farm or animals the milk came from this becomes a little more risky.

For all you organic nature lovers out there, pasteurization is simply the process of heating the milk to 72 deg or higher. It is nothing unnatural at all and the benefits it potentially provides far outweighs any negative effects it might have. Those negatives being the potential risk of catching TB or Brucelosis from the milk as well as e coli, campylobacta and listeriosis.

As far as chemicals go in milk, if you want to have the most natural product available then buy full cream milk. I am not sure what it is called in the USA, but it is the milk that separates into cream at the top and skim at the bottom when left in the fridge. This milk has been pasteurized only and had nothing added to it.

All of those homogonized milks, skinny milks, fortified calciums milks etc have had other processes done to them and are getting away from the completely natural product and contain things like small amounts detergent to keep the milk from separating.



posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 11:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Frogs
 


Absolutely, it is ALL about control. BUT, if this is 'commerce based", insofaras the family is selling the milk for more than just equal value of labor put into it, then the state may "REGULATE" transactions across state lines. BUT..... it is up to the FDA to PROVE that raw milk is and/or has been, bad for you. And then it MUST go before a public GRAND JURY for indictment before it can be brought to a trial. It is up to the people to decide what they put into theirs bodies and NOT the governments decision on what we can and can not eat. The FDA is supposed to protect us from CORPORATE food products that are chemically laden and DEFINITELY bad for you. I don't think there is "criminal intent" here on the part of the Amish family. The federal government MUST prove there was criminal intent otherwise it's ALL BULL CRAP and a control issue ONLY!!!!!



posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 12:17 PM
link   
"god" forbid one or two tissue paper babies die off.....



posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 12:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by nixie_nox
Whether you like it or not, there are standards when it comes to selling food. If the facility wasn't meeting compliance, then someone can get really sick.
Just because it used to be unpasteurized, doesn't mean that people are used to unpasteurized now. Not having the bacteria in teh system shocked it.
Milking a cow and throwing it in a bottle may seem quaint. But there are sanitazation protocols, and you dont want someone giving bacteria filled milk to an infant.


I and all of my family members have been drinking raw milk in my granddad's farm every summer every day for 20 years. We are all fine. In fact - fresh milk is more healthy than dead/pasteurized milk - as far as I can tell from my experience.



posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 12:33 PM
link   
Next thing you know the feds will be going after the Amish for that rickety furniture they make.



posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 12:40 PM
link   
What I see here is the FEDs thinking regular citizens can't make their own decisions without dealing with the consequences. They allow big giant companies to test their drugs on people as guinea pigs but when it comes to food or milk they go in with their batons and smash up the place. Too bad this amish person didn't have a bribe on hand maybe he could have been allowed to sell the stuff.

The fact is that there is always a chance of you getting sick when drinking ANY milk product. You have a chance of getting sick from eating Maple Leafs meat. You have a chance of contracting salmonella poisoning when eating raw eggs to get that protein like Rocky does.

But the FEDs want to make sure that no one sells you anything without them approving the goods, sound familiar? My parents never let me eat anything when I was a child without their approval!
edit on 30-4-2011 by Equinox99 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 01:49 PM
link   
While this made me laugh, it is still kind of sad. But really, an undercover milk bust? I bet those silly Amish didn't even know what hit them, lol. But seriously, they were apparently breaking some type of law, albeit probably a stupid one, otherwise this wouldn't have happened.

Now I don't know much about the Amish, except that they are pious and wear funny headgear, and it is hard for me to believe they would knowingly break the law. But then again I do not know.

As someone said earlier, no one is forcing anyone to drink the raw milk, and there are other things that can be done with the milk besides drinking it. For instance, you could take a bath in it. Or wash your dishes with it. Water, excuse me, milk the lawn with it. You see my point.

Apparently what the Amish were doing was too dangerous to turn a blind-eye to, so they used taxpayer monies to bring those low-lives down. Please, gimme a break.



posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 02:10 PM
link   
We used to buy Amish milk all the time.
We watched them filter it ,and pasteurize it, in a big stainless steel tub.
It's the only electrical equipment they had, that i could see.
No homogenization though. we liked to pull the cream off the top.



posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 03:12 PM
link   
What is really going on here is the clash between community versus mass culture.

In a small community, like the one I grew up in, you knew everyone and how they lived. You knew which little old ladies were too blind to see that their kitchen was crawling with roaches. No one stopped them from bringing a casserole to the pot luck supper, but no one would eat it, either.

A small community is self-policing in many ways. Food safety is one example.

But if you don't live in a community, then you rely on mass culture. Mass culture means buying food from strangers, people you'll never even know, and trusting that "someone" has looked in their kitchens and barns and that some basic standard is maintained. The way mass culture does this is through laws and inspections.

The change started in the early 1900s, about the time that Sinclair Lewis was writing "The Jungle."

Food processing began to take place in factories, and it was the owners' right to sell anything they wanted. And they did.

You'd think that companies that sold tainted meat etc. would go out of business, but they never did. Instead, they just cut their prices and took over their competitors. McClure's and a few other magazines did investigative pieces, but they couldn't find advertizers, and had trouble staying in business.

If you are going to live in mass culture, you're going to need the police powers of mass culture to maintenance it. That's what the story is really about.



posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 03:24 PM
link   
Anyone who buys any of the nonsense the government tells you about healthy milk is a damned fool. Just look at how cows are treated, the miserable lives they make them live. The Amish on the other hand treat their animals with utter most love and care and their milk is just fine as it is.
This is all about controlling the food market, nothing else. They will fool you with you scientific jargon that sounds appealing, but is really nothing but a trick.



posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 04:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by debris765nju
Milk is one of the first food groups to become irradiated after a nuclear reactor meltdown. The fallout ends up on/in the plants that the cattle feed upon. They concentrate that radiation into milk which is direct to the consumer.

What has changed? Fukushima is producing an unending stream of radioactive poisons that are even more deadly when ingested.

Fukushima is like an unwelcome visitor that will not go away until we physically remove it.


That was the first thing that popped into my head, but if pasteurization made it any safer we wouldn't have to worry when they say cesium is in the milk. I somehow don't think that is why they did it, and it was a yearlong sting. The Feds just feel they have to enforce rules they feel protect society. However, I feel that they take all this time to enforce a raw milk regulation while leaving young children to be affected by aspartame. Aspartame has a heavy lobbying component from the corporations so it remains untouched while the Amish have a main source of supply attacked, and why? Because they are more self-sufficient and it doesn't serve the nanny state. Another thing is I heard they can get waivers from the Affordable Health Care Act(for the obamites who are sensitive to pet names for the legislation). I think it is highly suspect the Feds go after them, as they don't partake of too many State health operations. So it makes me wonder if they are attacking self-sufficient people.



posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 04:13 PM
link   
Oh come on! Would you people stop it? What you are doing is wrong, by hurting and taunting the person that tried to make a difference. Raw milk is the healthiest milk you can find. What this Amish man tried to do is sell the good kind of milk and and it was the right kind, and the Feds came in and told him to stop.

Are they literally ripping up the Constitution just so that they can have some money in their pockets? This Amish man is one of hundreds of thousands being persecuted for doing something right, and you guys are hopping on the bandwagon that says "All good people do bad things!"

Where is you sense of honor? Sense of Courage? Better yet, sense of Benevolence?



posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 04:24 PM
link   
Tubercolosis is a big danger with raw milk and an even bigger danger when milking is done by hand. Pasteurization was one of the defining factors in ending the TB epidemic that killed millions. With more dangerous strains of drug resistant TB in circulation at the moment i have no problem with the banning of raw milk altogether.
But i dont agree with swat teams and year long surveilance and heavy handed tactics to enforce this,there are easier ways.



posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 04:35 PM
link   
reply to post by nixie_nox
 


Two issues.

One,

If the customer knows its not pasteurized and its not being sent from some corporate farm a thousand miles away to a processing plant and then a grocer which could take up to 5 days (in which case it is required to be pasteurized and doused with countless chemicals), then its completely legal and constitutional.


Two,

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." (10th amendment)

The fed does not have the power to enforce this, hell the FDA shouldn't even exist in the form that it does. It is not granted to the fed in the constitution and its not prohibited to the state therefore only the state has the power to determine and enforce such regulations.



I'm a grown ass man and if I want to drink unpasteurized milk then I'm gonna drink unpasteurized milk and if you try to stop me I am going to chug it as fast as I can and then burp in your face.



posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 05:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by jude11
I applaud our dark overlords for saving us from the evil bovine population.

Now they can move on to more pressing issues like the oncoming attack of the killer tomatoes.


Let's just hope they hide the tome of teleports, wirt's leg, and the horadric cube....



posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 05:29 PM
link   
Yes leave it to the FEDs to stop the EVIL AMISH from spreading their natural organic food . We cant have that people need the BGH and all the antibiotics and chemicals fed to the dairy cattle every day. And even worse someone not a corporation is making some money off it. The FED CANT HAVE THAT !

Thank God for the FED .



posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 06:00 PM
link   
There's a reason why the offspring of a mammal feeds from its mother's teet... it's called natural proteins, minerals, vitamins, and immunity strengthening to prepare for all the nasty bacterium in the world.

[insert slap forehead here]

Our bodies are so "anti-bacterialized" these days, is it any wonder we have "flu seasons" ?



posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 07:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by auraelium
Tubercolosis is a big danger with raw milk and an even bigger danger when milking is done by hand. Pasteurization was one of the defining factors in ending the TB epidemic that killed millions. With more dangerous strains of drug resistant TB in circulation at the moment i have no problem with the banning of raw milk altogether.
But i dont agree with swat teams and year long surveilance and heavy handed tactics to enforce this,there are easier ways.


You obviously don't understand who makes the diseases which we get. That is absolutely no joke either. But for all of you here, think ABOUT THIS....MAN is the only animal who sucks at the teet of milk after 1 and a half years of age!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Man is THE ONLY animal who drinks milk AFTER 1 and a half years of AGE!!!



new topics

top topics



 
41
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join