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.

 

Multi-agency armed raid hits Rawesome Foods, Healthy Family Farms for selling raw milk and cheese

page: 9
91
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 4 2011 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by crankyoldman
 


Thanks for your insightful comments....

... people need to really understand that "Government" doesn't really have an interest in shutting down independent farmers -- its usually their competition.

Almost all these ridiculous laws can be traced back to a corporate interest -- and yes, I agree, that the provision to have "processed milk" is their mostly because the big agro-companies want to ship things.

Also, the BGH (Bovine Growth Hormone) never made milk cheaper -- it's cost is artificially high (due to the lobbying of the Milk and Meat organizations). But the small farmers get out-competed by Big Agro that can produce twice the milk per cow. News Corp -- the company that owns Fox News -- sued their own investigative reporters to STOP them from reporting the cancerous effects and help problems related to the use of BGH -- and they won with help from the Supreme Court. I can only imagine, that Rupert got a big check from the Milk industry for hushing up this story.

That's how it works these days; "Government" really doesn't have an agenda -- merely a rudderless collection of people who are trying to get re-elected and the 95% guarantee of that is lots of Corporate donations. Therefore -- it doesn't matter "which team" or what "philosophy" gets spit out to justify whatever nonsense the politician is pushing -- it's Almost always, a sell out to their sponsors.

Dennis Hastert was accused helping Turkey get access to nuclear technologies by Sibel Edmonds -- and YEARS after her whistle-blowing went nowhere -- he is now a consultant for the country of Turkey and he lobbies our government. Are the Feds being controlled by Turkey, Israel or China -- because at the top, Sibel was obstructed from raising a stink? I'd say; no -- what is really going on, is that the head of any government agency is a political appointment (like any 4 Star General), and often the most corrupt kiss-ass gets the job. The lower echelons of Government bureaucracy are usually filled by hard-working, conscientious people otherwise things that you take for granted would have stopped functioning a long time ago.

The Fed and our Judicial system do not act on the Dennis Hasterts or the Abramoff's or the Rumfelds or the war profiteers like Dick Cheney, because they have alliances with other crooks -- and if they came down on one crook, the detante would be over and their patron crooks would get light shown on them. This is why politicians only seem to get caught with their pants down -- they all have issues, and only those who break the truce get punished.




posted on Aug, 4 2011 @ 12:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Dystopiaphiliac
 




Didn't Abe Lincoln's wife get sick and died from drinking unpasteurized milk? While unpasteurized cheese is perfectly healthy to consume because the negative germs and what not that can make you sick and kill you are combated by the healthy germs. Unpasteurized milk has a much higher chance of transmitting disease and harmful germs. Not to mention all the crap (literally) that is floating around in unpasteurized and unfiltered milk.


1. ALL the animals are TESTED for disease. Tuberculosis, Brucellosis

2. It is a CLOSED herd, no new animals introduced without quarantine and testing.

3. Prior to milking the udder is washed/sanitized... HECK, I do that when I milk out a goat or sheep to save colostrum and extra milk for for orphans and rejects.

4. The milk itself is TESTED.

There is no way these people want a big fat lawsuit and bad publicity.

The big factor is with a small herd on grass there are far fewer pathogens and it is easier to see if an animals is "Off"

I rather drink my nice CLEAN tested but untreaded well water than the chemically sSanitized City water... It is giving folks Giardiasis but the city will not admit it.



posted on Aug, 4 2011 @ 01:02 PM
link   
reply to post by MikeboydUS
 




People blame the government for this, but I guarantee there is a corporate aspect to this behind the government action...


ERRRRRRrrrrr There is a DIFFERENCE????


That is news to me.

I thought K street ran our government.

After all we have Monsanto puppets as head of the USDA and FDA and now Obama just appointed General Electric CEO Jeffery Immelt was tapped to lead a newly created Council on Jobs and Competitiveness.

You remember GE, the nation’s largest corporation with profits of $14.2 billion, who claimed a tax benefit of $3.2 billion.

The same guy who is against "buy American" and is shipping jobs off shore by the hundreds.

Foxes in the hen house and there are not manu hens or golden eggs left.



posted on Aug, 4 2011 @ 01:14 PM
link   
reply to post by VitriolAndAngst
 




... but it annoys me that people use this as an example of a "nanny state." The motives are likely the opposite -- it's and example of a "fascist state." ...


You see it

Unfortunately too many fall for the "Socialist" or "Do-gooder" or "Save the children" sheepskin that gets wrapped around the wolves so the sheeple do not notice.

Once the legislation is past it morphs into a monster that was worse than the problem.


David Icke: Problem Reaction Solution

So it works like this: First of all, you create the problem, but you get someone else to be blamed for it. You then report that problem through the media in the way you want it reported – because the media is owned by the same people who own the banks, etc. You get the public to react to your problem by saying, “Something must be done; this can’t go on; what are THEY going to do about it?” And at that point, THEY, who have covertly created the problem, and blamed someone else, who gleaned that reaction of Do Something, then offer the solution to the problems they have created.



The whole food safety issue that lead to the 2010 food act is a classic example. In this case the "Save the children" sheepskin was used.



posted on Aug, 4 2011 @ 01:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by neonitus
i think its a legal requirement for milk to be pasteurised (and cheese). they just shut down an illegal farm that was endangering the public.
edit on 3-8-2011 by neonitus because: cant spell


You're fukking retarded.

The public does not need "protecting."
edit on 8/4/2011 by dalan. because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 4 2011 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by newcovenant

Originally posted by Tholidor

Originally posted by neonitus
.
pasteurised milk is safer, thats a fact.


Care to provide any proof of that claim?

You do know what people who spout unsubstantiated opinions as facts are called don't you?


What do they call people who harass others without bothering to check on the claim themselves?

www.slate.com...


In February 1907, a New York physician discovered that his longtime dairy supplier had switched to pasteurized milk.

He so detested the practice—not to mention the taste—that, as he wrote to the New York Times, he would rather "run the risk of typhoid, scarlet fever, diphtheria, and tuberculosis rather than [endure] the evils that I believe would follow the systematic and prolonged use of pasteurized milk."

One assumes the doctor was indulging in a public temper tantrum, not broadcasting a suicide wish.

By 1907, physicians knew well the blistering fevers of typhoid, the terrible choking deaths of diphtheria, and what was then called "the white plague" of tuberculosis.

Raw milk containing those very pathogens had been linked to the deaths of hundreds of children in New York City annually.

And by the time that letter was published, some four decades of experiments showed that the quick-heat treatment of pasteurization could save lives.



My mothers infant sister was one of those that died of TB.
edit on 4-8-2011 by newcovenant because: (no reason given)


OMG an article from new york from 1907..... that is SO scientific and relevant to today.....wait what year is it again???? 1908?? oh wait no...its FREAKIN 2011



Originally posted by newcovenant
reply to post by pryingopen3rdeye
 



You have no right telling strangers what chances they have the right to take.


No, I don't but the FDA does.
Get this straight....
I lost an aunt due to this practice and so sorry if I don't agree and never will.
I think I still have that right don't I?


edit on 4-8-2011 by newcovenant because: (no reason given)



many many MANY people have lost aunts uncles neices and nephews to PASTEURIZED milk . oh but i get it, you dont care about them, you only care about what suits your own opinion, and you also care to FORCE that upon others.

idiotic
edit on 8/4/11 by pryingopen3rdeye because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 4 2011 @ 01:29 PM
link   
reply to post by VitriolAndAngst
 



...."Government" really doesn't have an agenda -- merely a rudderless collection of people who are trying to get re-elected.....


The problem is the collection of high power types DO have an agenda and long term plans and use the government, MSM and shools to push it forward.

History, HACCP and the Food Safety Con Job follows seventy years of deliberated destruction of US farming and rural life to "better fit the needs" of corporate America. The needs for a large cheap labor pool and captive customer base.

That is why the CED, sister organization to the CFR was formed.



posted on Aug, 4 2011 @ 01:32 PM
link   
Just to show you how skewed this is. A small dairy up in Northern California who essentially does the same thing herd shares, where the customer actually owns a share of the goat and there is a private contract between the customer/ owner and the caertaker/ farm. This farm I'm referring to has not sold it's product to any "non owners", yet is being told that the goat owners can not consume the milk of the animal they own on or off the property. This farm is being strong armed as well, and unnecessarily being put through the legal system, when they really have violated no laws nor have had any incident of an unclean product.

Mark McAfee, owner of Organic Pastures, one of the fully compliant commercial raw milk operations in California, wrote this letter of support for cow/ goat herd shares:



Letter of Support,



Please consider this a testimonial and a letter of support for Goat and Cow programs in CA.

I am a producer of retail approved raw milk in CA. I am subject to incredibly intensive and very expensive regulation for my raw milk products which are available throughout CA in 400 retail stores. More than 65,000 people each week consume our raw milk products.

I met with Mike Hulme two weeks ago. He brought with him some of his raw goat milk and raw feta cheese.

I have never been more impressed with the goat milk and cheese. It was incredibly fresh, clean and when tested it was cleaner than mine….now that is a real testimonial from a guy who knows raw milk. The results come as no surprise. When a small farmer takes pride in his milking and cleanliness, the results are obvious and you can taste the concern, work and effort.

It is about time that Californians take personal responsibility for their food, for their health and for their relationships with their food sources and farmers. Goat or Cow Shares are the ultimate expression of this consumer outreach effort.

There is no readily available retail raw goats milk in CA. If a consumer wants or needs raw goats milk they will need to buy their own goat. Most municipalities forbid the home boarding of goats or cows. This means the consumer must become a co-producer and contract with a farmer to house and milk their goat.

So far, CDFA has made this a criminal activity. This CDFA activity is “truly a canary” in the mineshaft of America’s eroding food freedoms and freedoms in general. Our current American diet has failed miserably and produces, obesity, diabetes, IBS, Asthma, Autism….it is a disaster. Consumers have come to understand this and now seek whole unprocessed foods. These farm direct unprocessed whole foods do not produce the same outrageous illnesses and outcomes. Consumers shall not be forced to eat foods that are sickening the broader population. No matter what CDFA or the FDA says or does.

These CDFA law enforcement raids are hitting a nutritional civil rights movement brick wall. This CDFA police enforced, DA lock down of constitutionally protected sacred food activity is nothing short of Fascist. It will stop and it must stop. There have been no illnesses reported in CA from these small Share based systems. Pure and simple, this is about CDFA trying its best to protect market share for Big Ag and pasteurized milk products.

The FDA has pasteurized milk listed as the most allergenic food in America. Pasteurized milk is associated with lactose intolerance and is a very dead food.

Consumers must have control over their health destinies and must not be forced to eat food that causes extreme food allergies and terrible gas pains. To them…pasteurized milk is downright dangerous and not health building.

Raw milk is just the opposite….it stabilizes MAST cells and treats and prevents allergies and Asthma ( see PARSIFAL study in EU ). Raw milk is also not commonly associated with lactose intolerance.

Please do what you can to assure the consumers and their farmers of access to safe clean delicious raw milk. Please make the message loud and clear….food is a sacred right, where that food comes from and whether that food is processed or not is also a sacred right.


All the best,



Mark McAfee

Founder CEO

Organic Pastures Dairy Company LLC

Fresno CA




These are small dairies who are absolutely conscientious about the quality and safety of the product they are providing and they are meeting an increasing demand. Many ill people are incorporating raw milk into their healing protocols, and it is a matter of life or death for them. Mothers who can not breastfeed and whose babies can not tolerate soy or pasteurized dairy formula (of which is not a healthy alternative to begin with) are successfully using home made formula from raw milk, namely goat.

As said before the story of pasteurization stated with unhealthy feedlot cattle:



8. Why is milk pasteurized?
In the 1800s, many US dairies began commercially producing low quality raw milk in the inner cities of Boston and New York and others. These Brewery dairies would feed their cows very poor quality "brewer's mash." The resulting milk was very weak and nearly blue from lack of protein, mineral, and fat content. This occurred during the Jamaican rum embargo. During this same time period, the dairy industry did not use or have access to refrigeration, stainless steel, milking machines, rubber hoses, hot water, or chlorine as a sanitizer. TB and Brucellosis were rampant (not to mention horse manure on the streets, flies, and lack of public sanitation and sewage) and the cows were milked by hand without mechanical machines. The cows stood in manure and there was no access to pasture (sounds like some factory dairy farms of 2005). The resulting unhealthy milk from these sources literally killed millions. The heating of milk to high temperatures reduced this horrible blight. During this same time period, milk from the countryside taken from pasture grazed healthy and clean cows was the best medicine of the day. In fact, the Mayo Clinic used this high quality country raw milk as a basis for many disease curing therapies. This was the untold story of raw milk. Because of pasteurization successes, commercial interests prevailed and all dairies (the good, bad, and the ugly) then began to pool their milk so that "nobody would die," even if milk quality was very poor. This was great news for milk mass marketing, and creameries created high profits. These pasteurization practices continue today with the chief benefit being extended shelf life. These modern dead milk products now cause allergies and lactose intolerance to huge sectors of the population. Current (PMO) Federal standards for pasteurized milk permit 100,000 bacteria per ml for milk going to be pasteurized with as many as 20,000 injured or living bacteria to be alive after pasteurization, and this may include pathogens (this is arguably the reason why milk is pasteurized). California standards for human consumption raw milk require that milk sold for raw consumption have fewer than 10 coliforms and fewer than 15,000 live bacteria per ml and no pathogens. OPDC averages about 1500 beneficial living bacteria per ml and no test has ever detected a human pathogen in our “raw milk samples.”



From Organic Pastures FAQ's

While I can see an issue if these products are being sold to the general public, to meet the needs of standardized production and testing, these are small farms with private agreements in which the consumers essentially own the cattle. There is no law that says you can't consume raw milk from your own cattle. They know these small farmers could in no way pull together the money to run a fully compliant operational dairy. There is a need for this product, and herd shares should be supported, as they are private and do nothing to harm the public, but rather bring health to those intelligent enough to recognize what proper, healthy and safe nutrition is.




edit on 4-8-2011 by kalamatas because: lots o typos



posted on Aug, 4 2011 @ 01:49 PM
link   
reply to post by crimvelvet
 

Originally posted by crimvelvet
reply to post by soficrow
 





You're right about the fact that there's horrible stuff going on that 'they' don't want us to know about. Like the fact that this whole mess is about multinational corporations negotiating for market share - the deal is 'shut down the little guys then maybe we'll clean up a bit of the crap we dump into your water, soil, food and air.'


YEAH, Thats the PLAN!

...

Upon hearing that the FFA member wanted to continue on in production agriculture, Gore reportedly replied that the young person should develop other plans because our production agriculture is being shifted out of the U.S. to the Third World." showcase.netins.net...


Clinton Ratified NAFTA and WTO in 1995.(open borders & no Tarriffs)


Agreed. Daddy Bush spearheaded the PLAN - via the original NAFTA terms signed by the USA, Mexico (?) and Canada (Mulroney) - designed for global corporate government, starting with North America, moving on to the whole Northern Hemisphere and onwards.

Every administration since then has been forced to play ball and follow the already-established deadlines for "trade harmonization." Critics at the time pointed out that human needs and concerns like civil rights weren't accommodated - but they were shut down.

Leftists in South America screwed up THE PLAN for the Northern Hemisphere part - especially that Chavez guy and the thirsty peasants in Cochabamba. So the Big Boyz moved on Iraq and focused on the Middle East. Now all those peasants are revolting too!!!

It's Global Monopoly and damn the stupid humans.



The US government is INTENTIONALLY putting in place laws that whiplash prices and bankrupt independent farmers all over the world.


Yep. Daddy Bush set the terms and the deadlines back in the '80's. Now the good guys are trying to (re)negotiate with the bad guys, and "compromise," just to stop the hungry masses from revolting all over the world and ruining everything.

Expanded from your post:


You may read this September 2010 report, courtesy of our Freedom of Information Act, at cia.gov.

...Here is an interesting and self-conflicted disclaimer, from its “Introduction,” page 1:

The term “global governance” as used in this paper includes all the institutions, regimes, processes, partnerships, and networks that contribute to collective action and problem solving at the international level. This definition subsumes formal and informal arrangements as well as the role of nonstate actors in transnational settings. Regional cooperation may also be regarded as an element of global governance insofar as it contributes to broader efforts. Governance differs from government, which implies sovereign prerogatives and hierarchical authority. Global governance does not equate to world government, which would be virtually impossible for the foreseeable future, if ever.



posted on Aug, 4 2011 @ 02:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by neonitus
some of these replys are quite silly.
pasteurised milk is safer, thats a fact. you know what people who argue against facts are dont you?
food laws usually have a pretty good reason behind them. this farm was talking short cuts to make more money whilst endangering their customers.

If you drink raw milk from cows in megafarms pumped full of antibiotics then yes, that is not safe. Raw milk from organic farms is healthier than pasteurized milk from non-organic farms. I know, I grew up on raw milk. And that is a fact.
edit on 4-8-2011 by dn4cer2000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 4 2011 @ 02:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by newcovenant
To clarify this incident for those deliberately or accidentally mis-informed...


The official word from the DA's office is that Stewart, Palmer & Bloch were arrested on criminal conspiracy charges stemming from the alleged illegal production and sale of unpasteurized goat milk, goat cheese, yogurt and kefir. The arrests are the result of a year-long sting. The 13-count complaint alleges that an undercover agent received goat milk, stored in a cooler in the back of Healthy Family Farms van, in the parking lot of a grocery store.



While it's legal to manufacture and sell unpasteurized dairy products in California, licenses and permits are required. Rawesome may have violated regulations by selling raw dairy products to non-members.]


blogs.laweekly.com...
edit on 4-8-2011 by newcovenant because: (no reason given)




Thanks....So there were selling the raw food products without the necessary licenses and permits needed to sell to non members. That clears it up a little.

Seems a little heavy handed way of handling it. Did the authorities try to contact the Farm about seeking the correct permits and licenses or did they take the "bash the door down" route. I wonder how much manpower and labor dollars were spent on this whole 12 month long investigation? Just seems a whole lot of effort to shut down one Farm, that could have been spent elsewhere "protecting" more people. Just my two cents.



posted on Aug, 4 2011 @ 02:10 PM
link   
reply to post by soficrow
 


Bush started the NAFTA mess but Clinton instead of slamming his food down....


In the U.S., Bush, who had worked to "fast track" the signing prior to the end of his term, ran out of time and had to pass the required ratification and signing into law to incoming president Bill Clinton.

Prior to sending it to the United States Senate, Clinton introduced clauses to protect American workers and allay the concerns of many House members. It also required U.S. partners to adhere to environmental practices and regulations similar to its own.

The ability to enforce these clauses, especially with Mexico, and with much consideration and emotional discussion, the House of Representatives approved NAFTA on November 17, 1993, by a vote of 234 to 200. The agreement's supporters included 132 Republicans and 102 Democrats. NAFTA passed the Senate 61-38. Senate supporters were 34 Republicans and 27 Democrats. Clinton signed it into law on December 8, 1993; it went into effect on January 1, 1994.[1][2] Clinton while signing the NAFTA bill stated: "...NAFTA means jobs. American jobs, and good-paying American jobs. If I didn't believe that, I wouldn't support this agreement." en.wikipedia.org...


As if those clauses mean diddly squat.

Clinton later said:

"We Made a Devil’s Bargain": Fmr. President Clinton Apologizes for Trade Policies that Destroyed Haitian Rice Farming

...Last month he publicly apologized for forcing Haiti to drop tariffs on imported subsidized US rice during his time in office. The policy wiped out Haitian rice farming and seriously damaged Haiti’s ability to be self-sufficient. Well, Clinton apologized at a hearing last month before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

BILL CLINTON: Since 1981, the United States has followed a policy, until the last year or so when we started rethinking it, that we rich countries that produce a lot of food should sell it to poor countries and relieve them of the burden of producing their own food, so, thank goodness, they can leap directly into the industrial era. It has not worked. It may have been good for some of my farmers in Arkansas, but it has not worked. It was a mistake. It was a mistake that I was a party to....


The blasted policies were INTENTIONAL and Clinton KNEW it! He is no better than any other politician except he can do a better con job.


Tyson has connections to Monsanto and Walmart through the Rose Law Firm which is directly linked to…Mr. and Mrs. Bill Clinton. ...

President Clinton has some interesting political affiliations with Monsanto that I was not aware of.

* As President, Clinton put Monsanto executives in at the FDA, as US Agricultural Trade Representatives, and on International Biotechnology Consultive Forums to name a few.

* “‘Rural Americans for Hillary,’ an advocacy organization for Mrs. Clinton were Monsanto’s lobbyists. Her former-employer, Rose Law Firm, represent Monsanto, the world’s largest GE (GE - genetic engineering) corporation; Tyson, world’s largest meat producer; and Walmart, the world’s largest retailer.”

* Rose Law Firm which has ties to Bill and Hillary Clinton has other connections: “Jon Jacoby, senior at the Stephens Group - one of the largest shareholders of Tyson, Walmart, DP&L - is C.O.B. of DP&L and arranged the Wal-Mart deal. Jackson Stephens’ Group staked Walton and financed Tyson. Monsanto bought DP&L and Walmart’s board invited Hillary on while Tyson executives helped her do a $100,000 trade just before Bill’ governorship. Jackson Stephens then backed Bill for Governor, and later President (donating $100,000).”

* In office, President Clinton along with his newly appointed USDA officials immediately “weakened chicken waste contamination standards, easing Tyson’s poultry-factory expansion.” As mentioned, Tyson has connections to Monsanto and Walmart through the Rose Law Firm which is directly linked to…Mr. and Mrs. Bill Clinton. With Tyson now supported by the Clinton FDA, the following took place.

1. Monsanto people were put in charge of food.
2. FDA okayed Monsanto’s rBGH (bovine growth hormone), first GE-product ever approved.
3. Despite bovine illness/death, FDA didn’t recall or warn the public.
4. When dairymen labeled milk “rBGH-free,” the USDA threatened confiscation.
5. Organic food was the last way around unknown danger. FDA tried to close that escape with new “organic” standards, to include: genetic engineering of plants/animals, food irradiation, sewage sludge fertilizer.

* DP&L’s “terminator genes” (now Monsanto’s) which prevent seeds from “working” after only one season cause farmers to repurchase new seeds rather than replant them or face lawsuits from Monsanto for “copyright infringement.” These are some of the deceptive tactics used by Monsanto that I was referring to in my commitment that ensnare uneducated Indian farmers causing massive debt and suicide as the only means of escape. These terminator genes were allowed to go into production during the Clinton administration.
* Monsanto employs child labor.

These are only some of the more direct initiatives with which Mr. Clinton and Monsanto have shared sponsorship.



edit on 4-8-2011 by crimvelvet because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 4 2011 @ 02:21 PM
link   
It is scarey how much we let the US gov. get away with.

The main reason is back in the 1800's early 1900's there wasn't many clean milk producers. Milk Cows was under fed and the cleaning procedures was lacking. Then we had an increase of sickness all around the country due to these practices. So they brought in laws to protect the people. But remember soap and water together was a new concept for such things around this time. That is why they brought in pasturizing for the safty of the public.

Today we do know about the spread of illnesses so we wash our hands, we wash utters and equipment. Even the backyard farmer has taken up these practices for thier family's protection. But the gov. can't trust small time local producers on a large scale to sell thier product up to the standards of the FDA, USDA and CDC. As it stands now if you want to infect your family that is still up to you, but to sell to the public that is a NO NO. Be glad you still have that right to do.

So what do you do? What can one do? Either you want big brother to protect you (example Katrina, Flooding, Tornadoes, Earthquakes, Nuclear regs.,Solar flares, Asteriods, Viral outbreaks) then on the other hand you say keep your nose out (example Pasterizing, immunizations, Wall Street rules of conduct, Abortions, Education, Child Protection, Social Security, Medicare, Gun Control and many many others). We as the people needs sit down and decide what we want.... either you do or you don't, not a maybe unless this or that.

Just so you know I am a backyard farmer who trys to be off the grid. I have chickens, geese, rabbits, goats. We provide our own milk and have never been sick from drinking it. I don't pasturize but I do clean all things that milk comes from or touches the milk. But I don't give out or sell to the public cause of illnesses, liabilty reasons.
BUT I DO KNOW AND UNDERSTAND THERE IS A RISK, EVEN A SMALL ONE, TO MYSELF AND MY FAMILY. So if anything happens I can't blame anyone but myself. I feel sorry for these people who get arrested but they know what the law is even before they sold thier first cheese log or Milk jug. That was thier choice.



posted on Aug, 4 2011 @ 02:31 PM
link   
I don't always drink raw milk but when I do I prefer straight from the teat...




posted on Aug, 4 2011 @ 02:52 PM
link   
This is an important story, and human beings need to organize and say "no" to an ever-encrouching Big Brother. We have the power to shape our lives if we have the courage to face up to bullies. We have the right to make our own choices and live without undue interference. I just donated to this man"s cause, please do so if you have even $5.00 to spare.



posted on Aug, 4 2011 @ 03:08 PM
link   
reply to post by TimesEnd
 



BUT I DO KNOW AND UNDERSTAND THERE IS A RISK, EVEN A SMALL ONE, TO MYSELF AND MY FAMILY. So if anything happens I can't blame anyone but myself. I feel sorry for these people who get arrested but they know what the law is even before they sold thier first cheese log or Milk jug. That was thier choice.


That is just the point.

It is a "Club" where people buy "Cow - shares" or "goat shares" it is not milk sold to the public at all but a CONTRACT. Differnet thing entirely. It is like a couple neighbors going halves to by a cow and boarding the cow at your farm sort of the same arrangement.



posted on Aug, 4 2011 @ 03:26 PM
link   
Hi, guys.....

I'm disappointed to see that several articles are reporting this event off of the same information from the Natural News and InfoWars websites because these sources have drawn erroneous conclusions from their sensationalist reporting on this case. If it has not yet been posted, here is updated article on the NatrualNews.com site (written in the same sensationalized manner) that links to a copy of the search warrant.


www.naturalnews.com...

www.naturalnews.com...

Please understand that I'm not doubting that those in power are trying to muscle out the small businesses such as these who promote raw foods. There is plenty of evidence to suggest that the government has an agenda targeting those who aren't going along with the program or who threaten (criminal) corporations like Monsanto.

Firstly, these agencies had an arrest warrant and a search warrant. I don't know exactly what code violations James Stewart is charged with, but from what I gather, they are felony charges stemming from a violation of international shipping laws. Obviously, there is a valid law on the books if Stewart was arrested, otherwise agents wouldn't have been able to get a search or arrest warrant signed by a judge. Whether he violated such laws, I have no idea....that's what the legal system will determine.


Some points I want to bring up:

It is very common for police to do surveillance on someone's home, and even follow them to another location, prior to serving these warrants for a number of reasons, one of which is so they can determine who might be present at the location(s) being served. For some reason, Natural News has given the impression this is something other than common practice in the service of these types of warrants.

Natural News has made these claims about what the government intends to do with some of the evidence they confiscated:



• Any evidence of "interstate transportation" (so they can charge these people with felony FEDERAL crimes). • All membership agreements of their current members (customers); this way they can intimidate customers, too. • Documents concerning the Right To Choose Healthy Foods (RTCHF) organization, which fights for food freedom at www.RawMilk.org (the government is going after these advocacy groups, too, with their terrorist tactics). • All tax records (so they can try to find some tax error and then charge them with federal tax fraud). • All real estate transactions, billing records, purchasing records and club records. • All emails, receipts, cash register data, credit cards receipts, inventory records and so on. • All computers and electronic devices. The warrant shows that government terrorists stole both Dell and Apple computers from Rawesome. • All address books, telephone numbers, contacts, client lists, business cards, etc. This is so the government terrorists can contact Rawesome Foods customers and then conduct illegal raids on their homes for buying "contraband" raw milk. Learn more: www.naturalnews.com...


What a shining example of pure, unadulterated sensationalism. It is not unreasonable that any of the above items could be confiscated as evidence from what we know so far. We don't even know the extent of the charges! Aside from that, the above contains presumptions about what the items will be used for that have no factual basis.




Law enforcement demanded that all customers (members) of the store vacate the premises, then they demanded to know how much cash James had at the store. Learn more: www.naturalnews.com...


Asking that the public to leave the premises during the execution of a search warrant at a business is not unusual or outrageous. Agents have to secure the scene of the search during the investigation, just as in any other case. Same goes for a search warrant is served at a residence. I it is customary for officers to have people leave the scene if they have no relevance to the investigation.



James was handcuffed, was never read his rights and was stuffed into an unmarked car. While agents said they would leave behind a warrant, no one has yet had any opportunity to even see if such a warrant exists or if it is a complete warrant. Learn more: www.naturalnews.com...


There was an arrest warrant, meaning that Stewart was charged with a crime. Why would he not be handcuffed? What difference does it make if he was placed in an unmarked car? As for the rest of it, obviously Stewart was provided with a copy of the warrant. Otherwise, how did Natural News obtain a copy of it? How ridiculous for this journalist to state, "No one has yet had any opportunity to even to EVEN SEE if such a warrant exists or if it is complete?" What is being implied here? That there is no search warrant just because the Natural News people haven't seen it? Absurd!

NEWS FLASH.....cops don't have to read people their rights until they start to ask questions of their suspect that might could lead to the suspect incriminating himself. Until such time that Stewart is directly questioned about the case, he doesn't have to be mirandized.




Law enforcement has demanded that if he comes up with the money to cover bail, he must disclose to them all the sources of that money. (This is an illegal demand!) Learn more: www.naturalnews.com...



No, this is NOT an illegal demand. It's standard procedure in cases where officials believe one has acquired profit from illegal activities. If they feel the money being put up for bail was derived from those illegal activities, it can be seized. If the suspect is found not guilty or the charges are dropped, then the property/money is RETURNED.

I don't know why the agents took all of the produce, milk, etc. when the search warrant specifically stated the agents could take samples. That is something that I am curious to know myself.

I'm not saying it's not possible that there was some nefarious intent behind this raid, but this story is a blatant over-exaggeration of reality and shows very little understanding of legal procedures by these journalists.















edit on 4-8-2011 by NightGypsy because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 4 2011 @ 03:28 PM
link   
reply to post by pavil
 





Thanks....So there were selling the raw food products without the necessary licenses and permits needed to sell to non members. That clears it up a little.

Seems a little heavy handed way of handling it. Did the authorities try to contact the Farm about seeking the correct permits and licenses or did they take the "bash the door down" route. I wonder how much manpower and labor dollars were spent on this whole 12 month long investigation? Just seems a whole lot of effort to shut down one Farm, that could have been spent elsewhere "protecting" more people. Just my two cents.



You are missing the actual issue completely. It is not about milk it is about CONTRACTS



The Farm was not selling milk they sold "Cow-shares" you bought a COW or part of a cow and therefore had a right to the milk produced by that cow. It was a private club not a farm selling milk or cheese to the public. Completely different beast legally.

THAT is what has got the FDA hot under the collar and why they are insisting that Americans have no "Right of Contract"

The loop hole messes up the plans of the MEGA-Corps to drive out all small businesses. They do not want to use a heavy hand and add the "Commerce Clause" to the "Food Safety Modernzation Act of 2010 ...YET!

That is the next step. If they try it now Liberals and Conservatives will turn in mass. Such a fuss was made that they had to take the "Commerce Clause" out of the final bill.... for now.


.... Ignorance about the law’s broad reach (and how it will be construed by the courts) has thwarted opposition to the bill, which will likely pass Congress. For example, a newspaper claims the bill “doesn’t regulate home gardens.” The newspaper probably assumed that was true because the bill, like most federal laws, only purports to reach activities that affect “interstate commerce.” To an uninformed layperson or journalist, that “sounds as if it might not reach local and mom-and-pop operators at all.” (The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Rosa DeLauro, has sought to forestall opposition to her bill by falsely claiming that that “the Constitution’s commerce clause prevents the federal government from regulating commerce that doesn’t cross state lines.”)

But lawyers familiar with our capricious legal system know better. The Supreme Court ruled in Wickard v. Filburn (1942) that even home gardens (in that case, a farmer’s growing wheat for his own consumption) are subject to federal laws that regulate interstate commerce.

Economists and scholars have criticized this decision, but it continues to be cited and followed in Supreme Court rulings, such as those applying federal anti-drug laws to consumption of even home-grown medical marijuana. Indeed, many court decisions allow Congress to define as “interstate commerce” even non-commercial. conduct that doesn’t cross state lines — something directly at odds with Rep. DeLauro’s claims. www.examiner.com...


It will be eventually slid in and you will find that the World Trade Organization through the FDA will be telling you how to plant and tend your garden.

I am sure they are already writing the regulations as we speak.... Unfortunately I am quite serious.



posted on Aug, 4 2011 @ 03:40 PM
link   


If you drink raw milk from cows in megafarms pumped full of antibiotics then yes, that is not safe. Raw milk from organic farms is healthier than pasteurized milk from non-organic farms. I know, I grew up on raw milk. And that is a fact.

i completely agree, theres nothing wrong with raw milk, but pasteurised milk lasts longer before it becomes suseptable to bacteria.
which is why i think its a good thing as most people will buy milk from supermarkets and not their local farmer.



posted on Aug, 4 2011 @ 03:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by dave0davidson
reply to post by jdub297
 


Wow this is just crazy. I was trying to learn more about what charges were filed against them, and I dug up a copy of the warrant to search rawsome foods. Check out the items they were looking for in the raid. It seems like the feds were more interested in getting lists of members, and lists of people who advocate raw dairy than they were about the actual milk.

Link to warrant


Excellent find!

The Warrant and return have afew details to note:

Case name, "STEWART," and the Case No. BA 385253

I plan to keep abreast of the destruction and lies. I'll see what I can find on the "co-conspirators," as well.

Thanks again

jw



new topics

top topics



 
91
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join