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.

 

Freedom watch: Not a single Democrat voted in favor of ending FDA raids on raw milk farmers

page: 5
16
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 28 2012 @ 07:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blackmarketeer
reply to post by frazzle
 


That's all fine and good, but you're making this into a debate about the virtues of raw milk, when the topic is about something else - Paul's amendment, and whether it would end raids on 'raw milk farms', and also about how the parties voted. "Not a single Democrat voted in favor of ending FDA raids on raw milk farmers" doesn't sound as lopsided when you also say "Neither did the Republicans vote to end FDA raids on raw milk farmers". A much more accurate headline would be "Both Parties Reject Paul's Amendment", but that doesn't quite fit NaturalNews brand of politics.

Paul may have thought changing the original law by having the phrase "knowing and willful" added to a large number of sections would have prevented such raids without actually spelling it out, but apparently not, and isn't the Mens Rea requirement pretty much implied in every law? We don't have to say he is guilty of bank robbing, but only if he knowingly and willfully robbed a bank. Much of the changes, if you will go and look, Paul made were in the food labeling section that dealt heavily with the forgery, tampering, counterfeiting, of such labels, and anyone who did such a thing, it's pretty well established they did so knowingly and willfully.

The FDA has an Office of Criminal Investigation, and that is where they draw their authority to carry firearms or conduct raids. Looking at what their primary function is, it seems they focus mainly on illegal supplements, counterfeit drugs, etc.:
FDA Office of Criminal Investigations
Looking through their list of cases, I'd say we NEED to have this agency, I don't think I'd like to walk into a store to buy some Avastin or Tylenol only to have it turn out to be a counterfeit shipped from China. That's how people die.

Paul would be much better off to find a way to exempt raw milk producers from coverage, rather than trying to rid the FDA of it's ability to investigate counterfeit drugs.


First of all, what you said to MountainLaurel: "The idea of shipping it to some store and letting it sit on a shelf is precisely WHY we created the laws against it in the first place - bacteria and pathogens in raw milk would result in an explosion of disease among unaware consumers." is very disingenuous. No one was selling raw milk to or from stores, people were buying it fresh from the farms.

As for your mantra about why we need armed goons raiding farms BEFORE any investigation takes place, the next thing you know they'll be raiding your refrigerator looking for out of date veggies. And your medicine cabinet for out of date tylonol. And looking for bomb making materials under your sink or sitting on your workbench. What's to stop them, after all, they're just trying to keep you safe. And the laws would be on their side.

Exactly what is an "illegal supplement", anyway? Isn't that anything congress and the FDA decide to declare illegal by their orders from the World Health Organization? Do you not see the slippery slope you're standing on?

And jeez, for having a cool nic like blackmarketeer, you certainly are displaying a distinct UN market control bent. Someone should warn you that it could easily come back to bite you in the asparagus.




posted on May, 29 2012 @ 09:40 AM
link   
reply to post by frazzle
 


Wow...and just wow....Frazz your a very smart, well spoken person....I am in awe at how well you "rocked" and expressed the "heart" of this discussion....Thank-You....♫



posted on May, 29 2012 @ 11:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by MountainLaurel
reply to post by frazzle
 


Wow...and just wow....Frazz your a very smart, well spoken person....I am in awe at how well you "rocked" and expressed the "heart" of this discussion....Thank-You....♫


Wow, I hardly know how to respond to that. There should be a blushing smiley.

But I do thank you, and hawkiye too, for saying such nice things about my rants. Its hard to say if the 'loyal opposition' would agree, but probably not.



posted on May, 29 2012 @ 01:28 PM
link   
reply to post by frazzle
 





Okay, so here is the intent of the law, directly from Rand's mouth.

TRANSCRIPT:

"President, today I’m offering an amendment to the FDA. I’m troubled by images of armed agents raiding Amish farms and preventing them selling milk directly from the cow. I think we have bigger problems in our country than sending armed FDA agents into peaceful farmers’ land and telling them they can’t sell milk directly from the cow.

"My amendment has three parts. First, it attempts to stop the FDA’s overzealous regulations of vitamins, food and supplements by codifying the first amendment prohibition on prior restraint."

You say there is "no mention of ending FDA raids period", yet in your own post denying the bill would do that, it is clearly stated that it would "prohibit employees of the Food and Drug Administration from carrying firearms and making arrests without warrants." Inquiring minds would like to know how you could mistake the meaning of that.

If you want to know what he was actually thinking in terms of this Act, going to the horse's mouth for the answer is probably better than guessing. www.randpaul2010.com...

As for me, I hope he reintroduces this legislation and keeps doing that until they cry "uncle".



Thanks once again for another excellent succinct post! Your on a roll keep it up!



posted on May, 29 2012 @ 04:25 PM
link   
Lame thread, considering the Republicans voted down this amendment as well as the Democrats.

If Rand wanted to make raw milk legal then why not amend the laws making it illegal, such as the PMO? Of course as soon as there is an outbreak of E.Coli, Salmonella, especially Listeria and bacterial infections. Personally I have no taste for milk, but I'm old enough to recall the threat of Listeria outbreaks from milk. Instead Rand is trying to remove the FDA's ability to investigate and police food and drugs.

CDC: Raw Milk Much More Likely to Cause Illness

I for one am GLAD we have truth in label laws for foods and drugs, and feel that buying dairy products are much safer using pasteurization.



posted on May, 29 2012 @ 05:57 PM
link   
reply to post by hawkiye
 


Well, for a few minutes there I was thinking there was no one left around but you, me and MountainLaurel. If you listened really hard you could almost hear the echo of little feet scurrying away and I figured maybe a few people had finally figured out that all the happy Amish cows are disappearing fast so if they wanted to grab a glass of fresh raw milk before there was nothing left but factory farm mad cows, they'd better get a move on.

But, oh me of little faith, it looks like fresh troops have arrived to make the exact same arguments as the old troops.





posted on May, 29 2012 @ 06:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by frankensence
Lame thread, considering the Republicans voted down this amendment as well as the Democrats.

If Rand wanted to make raw milk legal then why not amend the laws making it illegal, such as the PMO? Of course as soon as there is an outbreak of E.Coli, Salmonella, especially Listeria and bacterial infections. Personally I have no taste for milk, but I'm old enough to recall the threat of Listeria outbreaks from milk. Instead Rand is trying to remove the FDA's ability to investigate and police food and drugs.

CDC: Raw Milk Much More Likely to Cause Illness

I for one am GLAD we have truth in label laws for foods and drugs, and feel that buying dairy products are much safer using pasteurization.


Ssshhhhh! You are not supposed to use logic.
Most people know that raw milk cause illnesses, and thats why we use pasteurization.
I guess many people like the danger and dont mind getting others sick



posted on May, 29 2012 @ 06:33 PM
link   
reply to post by frankensence
 


I for one am GLAD we have truth in label laws for foods and drugs, and feel that buying dairy products are much safer using pasteurization.

If we have truth in label laws, why is there an amendment on the California ballot this year to create a law requiring truth in labeling?

Lets take high fructose corn syrup as an example and see how ingredient names are changed on labels to keep you in the dark about the crap you put into your body.

articles.latimes.com...
"Much in the same way that troubled companies change names to improve their reputations, the Corn Refiners Assn. is trying to do away with high-fructose corn syrup.

Not the product. Just its moniker.

The trade group said that it was petitioning the Food and Drug Administration to replace the phrase "high-fructose corn syrup" with "corn sugar."

Then there's MSG, which hides behind 25 other monikers ~ all to trick you into thinking the product label gives fair warning about the ingredients.
www.rense.com...

Incidentally, if you want to appeal to authority for stats, here's a couple of better reports for guidance on the honesty and integrity of that organization.

www.cnn.com...
abcnews.go.com...



posted on May, 29 2012 @ 06:37 PM
link   
reply to post by gorgi
 


Careful, you're more likely to scare yourself to death.


edit on 29-5-2012 by frazzle because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 29 2012 @ 06:39 PM
link   

First of all, what you said to MountainLaurel: "The idea of shipping it to some store and letting it sit on a shelf is precisely WHY we created the laws against it in the first place - bacteria and pathogens in raw milk would result in an explosion of disease among unaware consumers." is very disingenuous. No one was selling raw milk to or from stores, people were buying it fresh from the farms.


You obviously didn't read the opening article posted by the OP. It was the sale of raw milk at natural food stores that helped trigger the crack down on raw milk. NaturalNews was advocating for raw milk sales at natural food stores. Raw milk contains bacteria straight from the cow. Not in every instance, but often enough that pasteurization was needed to deal with it. Can raw milk be sold safely in a store? Can it be packaged, transported, stored, and then shelved for days, before being sold to a consumer? Not very likely. Raw milk contains bacteria, microbes, even cow urine/feces, and is a source for food borne disease, and that is the reason why it was pasteurized and sold in sterile containers - to protect the consumer. Buy it direct from a dairy farm or milk producer, that's one thing, but buying it at a natural food store? Not very safe.

But that's really against the point of this thread, isn't it? You're attempting to make anyone who doesn't support the NaturalNews article to be against raw milk in general. I've posted in favor of raw milk long before you were ever a member of this site. Just search my user name and "raw milk" and you'll see I've been a proponent of raw milk for a long time. I posted in this thread only to point out the inaccuracy of the NaturalNews article, which was clearly trying to make this into a partisan issue.


As for your mantra about why we need armed goons raiding farms BEFORE any investigation takes place, the next thing you know they'll be raiding your refrigerator looking for out of date veggies. And your medicine cabinet for out of date Tylenol. And looking for bomb making materials under your sink or sitting on your workbench. What's to stop them, after all, they're just trying to keep you safe. And the laws would be on their side.


Here you are stuffing words into someone's mouth. I never said we need goons raiding anyone before an investigation takes place. All I said is that the FDA has an office of criminal investigation, and they deal with a lot of issues, if you would bother to look at their case list, to see they deal with things like counterfeit medication, counterfeit cosmetics, etc., a lot of it produced in China and sold here under forged labels. The recent case on their PR list was counterfeit Avastin, a cancer treatment drug - you think we shouldn't have the ability to police the sale of counterfeit drugs? Who do you think will police that if not the FDA? Paul wants to strip them of any ability to investigate and police this sort of activity. It's a knee-jerk reaction that has implications that go way beyond his desire to stop raids on milk farmers.


Exactly what is an "illegal supplement", anyway? Isn't that anything congress and the FDA decide to declare illegal by their orders from the World Health Organization? Do you not see the slippery slope you're standing on?


Google not working for you today?
FDA Cracks Down on Illegal Supplements

The Food and Drug Administration is cracking down on manufacturers of certain weight loss, body building and sexual enhancement supplements that contain potentially dangerous ingredients.

The FDA said Wednesday that some manufacturers are deceptively labeling products to hide that they contain ingredients known to cause adverse health effects. Other supplements contain ingredients that should only be available by prescription.

"These tainted products can cause serious adverse effects, including strokes, organ failure, and death," said FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg. "The manufacturers selling these tainted products are operating outside the law."


F.D.A. Issues New Warning on Illegal Supplements

The F.D.A. has issued nearly 300 alerts about dietary supplements alone in recent years, including those containing sibutramine, the active ingredient in the drug Meridia. Meridia was withdrawn from the market by Abbott Laboratories in October due to heart attack and stroke risks.


I mean hey, I'd love to bottle some rat feces and call it a herbal remedy for baldness, but the FDA is the only thing keeping my from doing that. Without it we would be back in the snake-oil days of the wild west.



posted on May, 29 2012 @ 06:41 PM
link   
I also looked at the raid that NN keeps going on about, which is here:

Pennsylvania Dairy Farmer Operator Found in Violation of Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act

The farmer was legally allowed to sell raw milk in his state (PA), but not allowed to sell it across state lines, which is what prompted the FDA's actions.


The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania awarded summary judgment to the government on a finding that Daniel Allgyer, dba Rainbow Acres Farm and Rainbow Valley Farms, violated the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act and the Public Health Services Act, the Justice Department announced today. The court made the ruling on Feb. 3, 2012.

Allgyer is the owner and operator of a dairy farm located in Kinzers, Pa. An investigation conducted by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) showed that Allgyer was packaging unpasteurized milk (also known as “raw milk”) in unlabeled containers, and was then distributing the milk for human consumption in interstate commerce.

The FDA warned Mr. Allgyer that his conduct violated federal law. Instead of ceasing his illegal operations, Mr. Allgyer attempted to evade federal regulations that prohibit the interstate sale of raw milk by creating a private membership organization that he used to enter into cow-sharing agreements with his customers. In the order granting summary judgment in the government’s favor, the court found that the cow-sharing agreements were “merely a subterfuge” and issued an order enjoining Mr. Allgyer and his associates from distributing unlabeled or unpasteurized milk for human consumption in interstate commerce.

While some states, including Pennsylvania, permit the sale of unpasteurized milk, it is illegal to transport unpasteurized milk across state lines. Unpasteurized milk can contain a wide variety of harmful bacteria, including Listeria, E.coli, Salmonella, Campylobacter, Yersinia and Brucella.



posted on May, 29 2012 @ 07:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blackmarketeer

You obviously didn't read the opening article posted by the OP. It was the sale of raw milk at natural food stores that helped trigger the crack down on raw milk. NaturalNews was advocating for raw milk sales at natural food stores.


You and I must have read different OP articles. The one I read at the link provided had nothing at all in it about WHERE the milk was being sold. I even did a word search on the article and guess what ~ it ain't there.


But that's really against the point of this thread, isn't it? You're attempting to make anyone who doesn't support the NaturalNews article to be against raw milk in general. I've posted in favor of raw milk long before you were ever a member of this site. Just search my user name and "raw milk" and you'll see I've been a proponent of raw milk for a long time. I posted in this thread only to point out the inaccuracy of the NaturalNews article, which was clearly trying to make this into a partisan issue.


I will certainly agreee that it isn't a partisan issue and I disagree with Mike Adams for making it so. As I said before, its an issue of how 85% of "our" senators are really not there to represent us, but are the private property of Big Ag, Big Pharma and Big anything else with enough camnpaign dough and offers of enough nice little cloak room perks. I will back track this entire thread and see how pro raw milk you are and I will apologise if I've misread your intent.


Here you are stuffing words into someone's mouth. I never said we need goons raiding anyone before an investigation takes place. All I said is that the FDA has an office of criminal investigation, and they deal with a lot of issues, if you would bother to look at their case list, to see they deal with things like counterfeit medication, counterfeit cosmetics, etc., a lot of it produced in China and sold here under forged labels. The recent case on their PR list was counterfeit Avastin, a cancer treatment drug - you think we shouldn't have the ability to police the sale of counterfeit drugs? Who do you think will police that if not the FDA? Paul wants to strip them of any ability to investigate and police this sort of activity. It's a knee-jerk reaction that has implications that go way beyond his desire to stop raids on milk farmers.


No, that's not what you said. But THAT said, its silly to think we can be protected from every potentially dangerous thing out there and in the end, we are all personally responsible to determine what is and what is not safe for ourselves and our families to consume. All that information is freely available on the internet with a simple search and since the FDA ISN'T protecting people from the worst of the worst, the lawyers are getting damn rich off victims and the victim's families who have been given dangerous drugs that have been approved. A day never goes by that I don't get junk email from law groups asking if I've been harmed by this drug or that drug that the FDA doesn't give two hoots about. You probably get the same emails.


The FDA said Wednesday that some manufacturers are deceptively labeling products to hide that they contain ingredients known to cause adverse health effects. Other supplements contain ingredients that should only be available by prescription.


Aw yes, that's "our" heroic senators pushing Codex Alimentarius for the UN. That's been coming since 1962. Pokey, aren't they?


"These tainted products can cause serious adverse effects, including strokes, organ failure, and death," said FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg. "The manufacturers selling these tainted products are operating outside the law."


Aren't they missing some injury and death stats to back up that claim?

"It has been almost eight years since Vioxx® was withdrawn by Merck from the market, provoking an intense controversy about the role inhibitors of the enzyme COX-2 play in causing heart attacks and strokes. Since then, other drugs in the class from Pfizer, Novartis, and Merck have been withdrawn (Bextra®); have failed to be approved (Arcoxia®, Prexige®); or have been retained on the market in the US with a “black box” warning on the label (Celebrex®)." dangerousprescriptiondrugs.weebly.com...

All approved (except for two), prescribed and deadly. And so many more just like them, with injury and wrongful death stats to prove it.

Again, know what you're putting in your body. No one else cares. Really.
edit on 29-5-2012 by frazzle because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 29 2012 @ 08:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Blackmarketeer
 


Okay, I went back and did that check and I'll admit that I gave you credit for a few things said by another poster and for that I apologise.

However you also said the original bill was satisfactory as it was:

the original bill S.3187 already carries prohibitions against FDA official carrying firearms depending on the circumstances.

Can't you see how a gung ho swat team commander could wiggle around the phrase "depending on the circumstances"? If anything were to be required of ANY bill moving through the process or adopted as law, these gaping loophole phrases should be banned. Period.



posted on May, 29 2012 @ 08:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Blackmarketeer
 


The farmer was legally allowed to sell raw milk in his state (PA), but not allowed to sell it across state lines, which is what prompted the FDA's actions.

If its all about transporting raw milk across state lines, please explain what prompted the raids on RAWSOME and Healthy Family Farms in California.
www.foodrenegade.com...

IMO, they just make it up as they go because the FDA claims that we "have no fundamental right to grow or eat healthy food, that's a privilege."

www.truthistreason.net...

Can you defend that policy?



posted on May, 29 2012 @ 10:26 PM
link   
reply to post by frazzle
 



However you also said the original bill was satisfactory as it was:

the original bill S.3187 already carries prohibitions against FDA official carrying firearms depending on the circumstances.


Once again, and for the record, I did not say the bill was "satisfactory as it was", I only said that the original bill (S.3187) already carries prohibitions against when and where the FDA can carry firearms. I didn't see anything in Paul's amendment that would strip them of their firearms. I did see that he made a requirement for a warrant in making arrests. I'm not going to offer any opinion on that because I don't know what sort of statutes the FDA is operating under when it makes a criminal investigation. If the FDA were investigating counterfeit heart medication being smuggled in from China should they not be armed? Would this be equivalent to stripping the FBI of firearms or the ability to make arrests without warrants? Why make the FDA operate differently when involved in a criminal investigation than any other agency? I don't think Paul's amendment took that into account.

As far as Rawsome Foods goes, here is another perfect example of why Natural News is a sensationalist joke of a site. It wasn't a SWAT style raid, but a uniformed police low-key arrest of the owner, who refused to get a permit for selling raw milk, which is LEGAL TO SELL in California. Again, he was never "raided". No SWAT. The owner had to have permits to operate a store. He had to have a business license and all that other stuff. He was required to have a permit to sell raw milk, and not having that permit it why he was arrested.

The Rawesome Raid and the Controversy Over Raw Milk

[...] While the raid itself appears to have been pretty by-the-book, rather than a SWAT-style raid as originally reported by Natural News [...]

California apparently does allow the sale of raw milk but requires a permit to do so. I’m not sure why James Stewart did not have a permit. It’s possible the milk in question didn’t qualify, or that he simply didn’t believe the regulations applied to his store since it is essentially a private “drop-off-point” rather than an actual grocery store. Private individuals pick up privately distributed food from local farmers. If that’s the case, apparently regulators disagreed.


From local news coverage (video as well):
KTLA - Venice Market Owner, 2 Others Arrested in Raw Dairy Sting


During a year-long investigation, investigators made undercover purchases of unpasteurized dairy products from Healthy Family Farms stands at Los Angeles, Ventura and Santa Barbara county farmers markets and at Rawesome.

The products included unpasteurized goat milk, cheese, yogurt and kefir.

In one instance cited in the 21-page complaint, an undercover investigator 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 is lawful to manufacture and sell unpasteurized dairy products in California, applicable licenses and permits are required.

These include regular veterinarian inspections of the animals and following equipment and sanitation requirements.


Had Rawsome Foods gotten the proper permits, they would never have been arrested, after a 'yearlong investigation with undercover buyers making raw milk and other purchases'. Instead most people think a SWAT team stormed through their doors in order to suppress raw milk, thanks to bad tabloid-style reporting of Natural News.

So there you have it.
Pennsylvania - LEGAL to sell raw milk, just not across state lines.
California - LEGAL to sell raw milk, just have to have a permit.

Both these cases were sensationalized by NN. I'm a big believer in keeping raw milk out of stores. They are ticking time bombs when it comes to E.Coli and Listeria. Keep the sales strictly on the farms where applicable and get the permits.

Unfortunately my state outlaws raw milk sales, and it's not the FDA we have to worry about but our state's Department of Agriculture, which will send undercover agents into farms and cajole farmers into selling them a gallon, and will arrest them if they do. The way we deal with it is to buy into "Herdshares", where you (and maybe several others) buy a cow and board it at a dairy farm, and when you want your milk, you're getting it straight from your own cow, and letting Farmer Brown do all the boarding and milking for you.



posted on May, 29 2012 @ 10:47 PM
link   
reply to post by frazzle
 


Oh geez Fazzz and Hawk....your both very special people...I don't know that I can take another minute of this nonscence anymore....and I'm not able to speak as well as you both...lol....basically, I am drinking beer, listening to "black chick" music.....hey, it helps....lmao....black chicks are pretty cool, and I say that with great affection, being some dumb ass Irish girl, that will sober up tomorrow and keep friggin trying....♫



posted on May, 29 2012 @ 11:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blackmarketeer
reply to post by frazzle
 


As far as Rawsome Foods goes, here is another perfect example of why Natural News is a sensationalist joke of a site. It wasn't a SWAT style raid, but a uniformed police low-key arrest of the owner, who refused to get a permit for selling raw milk, which is LEGAL TO SELL in California. Again, he was never "raided". No SWAT. The owner had to have permits to operate a store. He had to have a business license and all that other stuff. He was required to have a permit to sell raw milk, and not having that permit it why he was arrested.

California apparently does allow the sale of raw milk but requires a permit to do so. I’m not sure why James Stewart did not have a permit. It’s possible the milk in question didn’t qualify, or that he simply didn’t believe the regulations applied to his store since it is essentially a private “drop-off-point” rather than an actual grocery store. Private individuals pick up privately distributed food from local farmers. If that’s the case, apparently regulators disagreed.


From the link I posted (which was not NN), "Rawsome Foods is a private co-op with a closed membership. Technically, they are not “selling” anything to the public, but rather coordinating the efforts of private members to buy and produce raw foods, including raw dairy. This is why they are operating without a license or the “appropriate” permits. They do not consider themselves a store that’s open to the public, but rather a private club."

So I guess you could call what they were doing something like "herdshares", but I don't know how undercover agents managed to buy anything, at least from Rawsome, unless they lied to become members.

Sadly, We The People went to sleep a long long time ago and too many of us are only now waking up to discover that we live in the United Socialist Soviet Gulag of what once was the American States and any semblance of "government by the consent of the people" was overthrown by usurpers while they slept. I just can't fathom how some people can justify what is being done to us in the name of "THE LAW". But one thing is for sure, Bastiat was no slouch.

ETA: So don't call the raid a SWAT team if you're so offended by the acronym, it was carried out by gun carrying officers of the LA County Sheriff’s Office, the FDA, the Dept. of Agriculture and the Centers for Disease Control. On peaceful citizens. Overkill maybe?


edit on 29-5-2012 by frazzle because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 29 2012 @ 11:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by MountainLaurel
reply to post by frazzle
 


Oh geez Fazzz and Hawk....your both very special people...I don't know that I can take another minute of this nonscence anymore....and I'm not able to speak as well as you both...lol....basically, I am drinking beer, listening to "black chick" music.....hey, it helps....lmao....black chicks are pretty cool, and I say that with great affection, being some dumb ass Irish girl, that will sober up tomorrow and keep friggin trying....♫


You're no dumb ass Irish girl, there is no such thing as a dumb Irish girl. And you've held your own darn well in this stupid argument, every step of the way. Well, at least until you decided to hog all the beer.



posted on May, 30 2012 @ 12:59 AM
link   

"Rawsome Foods is a private co-op with a closed membership. Technically, they are not “selling” anything to the public, but rather coordinating the efforts of private members to buy and produce raw foods, including raw dairy. This is why they are operating without a license or the “appropriate” permits. They do not consider themselves a store that’s open to the public, but rather a private club."


And from the link I posted, they obviously WERE a store and open to the public as well, you would also have seen that the FDA had made purchases at this store as well. So it couldn't have been too 'private'.

Here is Rawsome Foods profile on Yelp; looking at the customer comments, sure looks like an open public mart to me.


This place is the real deal. it's the only place you can buy raw goat milk in all of los angeles. they also have the best dairy products and grass fed and finished meats anywhere.

Not sure why people are complaining about the prices. these are commensurate with farmer's market prices but you have James vetting every vendor for you. He finds NON-GMO and biodinamic which is even more reliable than organic -- because the label USDA Organic doesn't mean much anymore...



They have some of the most amazing raw cheeses that you can find anywhere. They also have great ceviches (chicken and fish), kombucha, and sushi grade cuts of fish (salmon, tuna, swordfish). You can also find eggs, raw dairy, beef, and farm fresh produce. They also have a bunch of different types of tasty honeys (which you may sample).

Basically if it can be eaten raw (whether you knew beforehand is another story), then it is here and it is fresh and organic.



B's roomie just recently started the raw food diet and was kind enough to take me along on one of his weekly "grocery shopping" adventures at Rawsome, which turned out to be a pretty eye-opening experience all on its own.

Rawsome is located behind the gargantuan Whole Foods on Lincoln and Rose. Parking shouldn't be an issue since there are several large lots, plus ample street parking, in surrounding areas. The store itself is quite small. It costs $1 for a day pass, or $8 (I think) to sign up for a 1-year membership. I opted for the day pass.

Tons of raw food products to choose from. Jars of delicately flavored honey, tins of raw cheeses and spreads, cacao nibs, milk and cream, and some of the freshest fruits and vegetables I've ever seen. There are also two walk-in freezer compartments brimming with fruit and vegetable juices, raw chicken and steaks, and various sundry goodness.


etc., etc., etc. You can buy your "one day pass" for $1 and shop all you want. It doesn't take a lawyer to see that in the eyes of the court, this would be considered a public market.

PS: According to the FDA PR release, the owner was arrested for more than just the raw milk sales without permits, but the raw cheeses and other raw dairy.

I'm not saying I agree with them being arrested, I'm just saying the facts aren't being presented fully by Natural News. It also seems like a lot of this trouble would have been avoided if the owner had just gotten the proper permits, especially since California allows the sale of raw dairy with said permits.

edit on 30-5-2012 by Blackmarketeer because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2012 @ 01:22 AM
link   
reply to post by frazzle
 


LOL, ok...re-grouped.....stopped drinking beer...had a bowl of cheerios and "poison" milk....feel better....


so I gotta share this story, I hope the mods will allow me to veer off the subject a minute, my daughter just brought home 3 orphan kittens.....lmao...I looked up to the sky and said to God "really"? It's not enough to make me worry and fight all the battles you have put in my awareness....now I gotta take care of 3 baby kittens?

My daughter is 21, and just moved back home a few months ago.....LOL....this kid kicks my ass.....it is soooo true you reap what you sowe......or something like that...God knows I put my Mom through hell too....wink....

Anyways, these kittens are adorable...they like tuna...and were very thirsty........♥



new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join