The Ohio Family That Was Raided by Swat, RETURNED MY EMAIL!!!!

Originally posted by greeneyedleo
From official Cleveland OH news:

"The problem is these people on the Internet, from who knows where, were not there," said sheriff's Capt. Richard Resendez. "They make up all these innuendoes and create all these issues that are basically not true."

One of the highly charged postings reads: "SWAT team with semiautomatic rifles . . . herded the family onto the couches in the living room, and kept guns trained on parents, children, infants and toddlers, from approximately 11 AM to 8 PM."

Another says: "It reeks of police state, lack of Constitutional Rights, and excessive use of force." Yet another site adds a photo of a SWAT team with guns pointed. The SWAT photo is from Long Beach, Calif.

Resendez said four deputies conducted the search over three or four hours - not the nine claimed on some sites. There was no SWAT team and no semiautomatic weapons.

"We don't even have semiautomatic weapons," he said.
www.cleveland.com.../base/lorain/1228901590175700.xml&coll=2

Yeah, I don't believe the official story at all!! I was skeptical from the moment I read it. Maybe they are NOT speaking out, because they are lying...well grossly exaggerating on what really happened and they know they will be caught.

I have to side with the "exaggerated and fabricated" story. *Fail*



[edit on 12/10/2008 by greeneyedleo]

Well that explains it a bit better. Heck some of my family dabbles in Ebay and they even got a licenses from the state to be able to charge sales tax etc.

I'm guessing their lawyers are drawing something up to say they don't need a retail licenses.

Why then did they send an "undercover" person to purchase eggs? The family admitted in 2007 to selling it and they did nothing then. I would think if it was an open and shut case they could have took action right then and there when they admitted to it.

reply to post by greeneyedleo

Originally posted by greeneyedleo
Maybe they are NOT speaking out, because they are lying...well grossly exaggerating on what really happened and they know they will be caught.

I have to side with the "exaggerated and fabricated" story. *Fail*
[edit on 12/10/2008 by greeneyedleo]

Another reason to keep quiet would be to cash in on the sympathy vote.

reply to post by greeneyedleo


Well if this is the case it totally contridicts the email sent to me from the Stower's family. Since we cannot validate the police officer's claims I believe we should wait for further information from the Stower's family before coming to any abrupt conclusions.

Also how can we be so sure the Sheriff is telling the truth? Another thing that doesn't make sense is why a local sheriff would be policing a state matter; the state police should have been used if that was the case. Something still doesn't seem right.

[edit on 10-12-2008 by Lokey13]

[edit on 10-12-2008 by Lokey13]

From Greeneyedleo's link:

Serazin said charges are likely later this week. He also said that if the Stowerses try to reopen without obtaining a license, he would likely go to court to block it. "Protection of health is one of the important roles of government," Serazin said. "That's what this is all about."

Excuse me?? Since when is it government's role to protect me AGAINST MY WILL? When and where did they get the "right" to protect me from things I don't WANT to be protected from?

Protection of health my cheeks. More like protecting the commercial food industry's profit margin and sales taxes.

We've definitely let government get too big and nosy. Haven't they got anything better to do, like, umm, fix the ROADS maybe?

I don't know why everyone thinks this is bogus out of hand for. Have not we all heard very bad stories of the coming Police State? Whether it was Wisconsin and gun grabs, or Rubix Cube knockoff sellers being raided by armed men, or Katrina victims being disarmed and guns destroyed.

This has been happening for a while all over the U.S. but it really picked up after the Patriot Act, Military Commissions Act and others that have, in theory, taken our Rights and given the government and it's agents near unlimited power of spying on Americans, Arresting Americans, Holding Americans without charges or bogus ones, ETC. ETC..

I think the term in that email that was important was "Industrialized" beef, what does this mean and if it means what I think then it is now against American Law to raise your own beef and eat it or sell it to friends and customers because the Government needs it "Industrialized"?

Does this mean genetically altered, or possibly hormone or other substance injected beef? Does this mean that only huge packing companies can sell beef to the public? SO much for small business' if that is th case.

I think this is a great find and there is more of this going on than is reported anywhere...

This makes me think about the words of T. Jefferson and when the American people are going to stop accepting the long train of abuses and usurpations and TAKE THIS COUNTRY BACK!

Furthermore this sounds a bit like a farm operated farmers market. And usually this is allowed on farms. So the food chain stores were complaining?
Reminds me of the family farmer's market we had for years up north. I grew up on a farm and had a farmer's market up north. I believe in small businesses. People need to start buying from each other, and stop giving the neocons the money they need for their mismanagement of our planet.

reply to post by Lokey13


Well, I understand what you are saying.

It is one word against another and im sure the facts/truth will come to light eventually.

Still all stinks to me. lol

reply to post by greeneyedleo


It doesn't just stink it reeks but of what we don't know yet. Hopefully that will be resolved soon, I just don't know why they would have local police take care of a state matter; I mean they usually help but they are never in control of the full blown investigation. I also don't understand how county deputies would be able to find "financial" information and why would they be schooled on how to obtain it; considering this isn't basic criminal evidence.

[edit on 10-12-2008 by Lokey13]

reply to post by mystiq


Very true, but if there is any weight to this claim we won't be able to find food on the farm for very long. Hopefully we find out that the family was involved in something else other then just farming sales and practices or this could be the start of something extremely ugly.

reply to post by theindependentjournal


Yes you may be quite right, the FDA is trying to police the matter because they make no profit off of closed sales. They also lose out on alot of money from injected hormones, pesticides, and the taxation of goods on the grocery store shelf. I suppose the government is trying to penny pinch everywhere, even from honest hard working citizens (or so one might think).

Originally posted by Rollinster

The USDA just released their plans to put a law into action that will put all small farmers out of business. Animals for the sale of meat or milk will only be allowed in commercial farms, even the organic ones.

Sorry, I should have stated which article I was referring to. It would be this one you quoted from an external source.

I would like to see the source for this as I have seen many references to this text, but I can't find where this information came from originally.

For the record, I don't agree with Governments dictating to us what we can and cannot eat.

This is also extremely interesting from the same local newpaper article 2nd page:

At the same time, store policies say it does not sell to the public - only to members of the co-op who pay a membership fee. Openly proclaiming it is not licensed and does not plan to obtain a license, Manna has members affirm that they "take full responsibility for their own health, health choices, food choices and food quality."

County officials say the business cannot operate that way.

Assistant County Prosecutor Scott Serazin said any business that sells perishable foods must be licensed and follow regulations covering those who store and supply food. There is no exception in the law for a co-op, Serazin said, and Manna cannot ask customers to waive safety regulations

The Lorain County Health Department tried to inspect the Storehouse in November 2007 but the family told inspectors to leave the property. Jacqueline Stowers wrote the department the next month that Manna does not need a license and that the inspection was an attempt to "cunningly coerce unlawful entry into our house and private property."

In September, the county asked the Ohio Department of Agriculture for assistance, and an agent purchased eggs at the store. When agents learned of a possible delivery of meat, they obtained a warrant to search for evidence of the business's activities.


So in fact she did tell me something of truth, that they had men their earlier who tryed to coerce their way into the warehouse. It also states that people signing a waiver doesn't comply when it clearly does; I'm a mixed martial arts fighter in my spare time and I have waived my rights so the gym would not be at fault if I were to be killed in the ring; how is the consumption of food any different. This sounds like alot of illegal mumbo jumbo but I know one thing a waiver is stated as such for that exact reason, the rabbit hole gets deeper.

[edit on 10-12-2008 by Lokey13]

[edit on 10-12-2008 by Lokey13]

spoke to local pd.. it did not happen in there jurisdiction.. Loraince county sheriffs dept is the pd.. www.loraincountysheriff.com...

[email protected]

[edit on 10-12-2008 by thefreepatriot]

reply to post by Lokey13

Originally posted by Lokey13
reply to post by theindependentjournal

 

Yes you may be quite right, the FDA is trying to police the matter because they make no profit off of closed sales. They also lose out on alot of money from injected hormones, pesticides, and the taxation of goods on the grocery store shelf. I suppose the government is trying to penny pinch everywhere, even from honest hard working citizens (or so one might think).

I doubt very much if the FDA makes a penny on this. They are not a for-profit organization.

People can take their stock to the butcher and have it processed for their own consumption. They assume all risks in doing so.

But when the food makes it into the public supply chain, that is when regulation is needed. And that is what I believe will be the essence of this case.

Food co-ops have been around for centuries. They thrive until they start breaking the rules.

to sheriff

show details 3:30 PM (0 minutes ago)


Reply



Good afternoon,

I would like to know which agency conducted the Manna Storehouse raid.. If it was an outside agency I would imagine they would have had to notify your department.. If you do not know please direct me to who does. I am writing an article and would like to have this clarified as the family does not seem to know which agency raided there home.


Thank you

Waiting for reply... if I don't receive one by tomorrow I will call them up.

reply to post by jsobecky




The FDA doesn't make a penny yes.. but the FDA is corrupt from the inside.. and people working for the FDA always gets nice cushy jobs in the food and drug industry after leaving.. So to clarify its the people in the FDA that make the penny...

reply to post by thefreepatriot


Thanks Patriot great work. I hope to hear your answer ASAP... Trunks is the man by the way. Also a very good point about the FDA, at heart it's supposed to be an organization for the people but more and more it seems like they are just another branch in the pockets of Medical Companies and Chemical Companies.

[edit on 10-12-2008 by Lokey13]

reply to post by jsobecky


But this food is not in the PUBLIC supply chain anyone ordering from the coop is a registered member that has signed a waiver. I related the same term of signing a waiver to a boxer, who has to sign away liability of his life to step into the ring for a fight; so exactly how is the consumption of food any different? The FDA is a branch of the government and if you don't think their trying to make an example of this case; what exactly are they doing then? Because it seems to me they are policing on a private matter.

Im not sure if anyone else caught this, but I was watching CNN on Sunday and they were talking about some sort of new legislation that the USDA and some other gov agencecies are trying to pass that will allow the Feds to tax ranchers and dairy farmers up to $1500 per animal per year to offset the negative impact that the animals gas releases are having on the Earth's atmosphere.

No this is not a joke. Think, $1500 per animal per year, some of these ranchers are already struggling to stay afloat. Keep in mind that some of these farms have 1,000's of heads of cattle. If I recall correctly this will also apply to pig farmers as well.

Bottom line is this is clearly an attempt by the USDA and whoever else to break the backs of American farmers. Using this idiotic global warming argument in order to justify it.

I will look for any article or news source that may be available online and when I find I will post links.

reply to post by BlackOps719


It is true they want to impose a tax. It was posted elsewhere on ATS a short time ago. I can't remember the thread though.

Cow Tax Proposal