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

Government can't do jack squat to prevent everybody from eating what they want to eat, these are fear tactics and they're not winning, they're pissing off the people even more.

They could've actually tested the milk and if it came out bad, they have all the right to dump it. Why dump good milk?

Raw milk is actually safe to consume if the source is well contained (grounds and cattle). They'll never stop me from consuming raw milk.

legal update on the case if you are interested, good news, the judge sees the case clearly.

www.youtube.com...=26

video of the raid: letting the foods sit & spoil in the sun for hours before taking away for testing.

www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by jdub297

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

www.naturalnews.com

This is a NaturalNews exclusive breaking new report. Please credit NaturalNews.com. A multi-agency SWAT-style armed raid was conducted this morning by helmet-wearing, gun-carrying enforcement agents from the LA County Sheriff's Office, the FDA, the Dept. of Agriculture and the CDC
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.

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.infowars.com

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
US Government Declares War on Raw Milk
SWAT Team conducts food raid in rural Ohio

This war on Raw Dairy products has been going on for more than 20 years. I LOVE raw milk and have not been able to find it here. More than 20 years ago, they made all raw dairy products illegal in the state. You have to know a dairy farmer who is willing to sell you raw milk on the sly. Insane.

Pasteurized milk is awful tasting -- I will not drink it cold. I can only tolerate it if it's part of a soup or sauce.
The Pasteurization process destroys all the living enzymes in raw milk -- the way it was meant to be ingested.

Supposedly this is about protecting us from TB. But, I think TPTB really want to destroy sources of truly nutritious foods.

Originally posted by jdub297

Originally posted by newcovenant
reply to post by Tholidor

 

You are not even reading are you?

There's an element of wishful thinking to many food mythologies, but—unlike the haloed status of raw milk—most don't lead directly to risky behavior or public health concerns or physicians complaining that increased consumption of "nature's perfect food" has led to a recent doubling in the number of milk-borne disease outbreaks.

www.slate.com...

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

Blaming an unwise end user is more justified than a potentially harmful product. People should rely upon their common sense a little more often, rather than hoping some gov't reg or authority will protect them from their own foolishness.

How do you explain 36 million pounds of tainted turkey, all bearing the Cargill QC approval code and the USDA "seal of approval?" Explain to the dead, dying and sick how gov't intrusion and safety regs have helped them, instead of proper care, handling and preparation of food.

deny ignorance.

jw

You and another poster here make me recognize the real problem we are skirting is our government has legalized things we DON'T WANT and keeps many things WE DO WANT away from us.

Calling it a "Nanny State" does an injustice to what is wrong. Nanny State means stop interfering in what we can and cannot have but the problem goes much deeper.
There is a lot of stuff already here that needs banning and much arbitrarily deemed illegal, that needs to be made available to people who want it.

We the People need to be responsible for and make the decisions that affect us.

There is a lot that goes on behind our back and that is the first thing that should stop.
I know Obama promised transparency.
So what? He is a temporary figure head, he can promise and lie till he turns blue.

We want transparency naturally, but what we really want is
NO DECISIONS TO BE MADE WITHOUT OUR INITIATION,
INSTIGATION & PRIOR ACCEPTANCE AND APPROVAL.

Make it a law.

Stick the transparency...because this allows people to be transparent when they want, esoteric and secretive when they don't. Forbid them doing anything without letting US know, not a body in Washington to do the participation and decision making for us.


I don't know how we can manage this but, its the only way forward.

We want to decide everything that affects us and we should have the final word.
Not an elected representative,
Not an appointed official.
Not a corporation so large it's voice is louder than ours.

And we need to make informed decisions
so we need a way to download accurate and unbiased information that must be disseminated first (some proof you know what the issue involves should be required) and a way to upload a vote or decision or answer.

The majority should rule or we may decide on more than one correct answer.

This is the NWO.

Originally posted by jdub297
reply to post by newcovenant

 

What they were raided for and charged with has nothing to do with their product.
They were raided for selling to "unsuspecting" non-members.

No they were not.
They were raided for selling from a truck to a fully-informed law enforcement officer/investigator who knew exactly what he was buying, and what the risks were in consuming the products.

This was a regulatory offense that should be punishable by a fine or injuction, not arrest and imprisonment.

It has everything to do with their product.

jw

Oh sorry.
He was a member?
I didn't know that.

reply to post by jdub297



People outraged about this should have spoke up when they made cannabis illegal and alcohol and tobacco legal. Now there's outrage over milk? The horses are out. You are trying to close a door too late.
Have we ever got what was good for us? No. Because we don't demand it.
I was shocked to find many American companies producing food for sale to China make batches without certain synthetic ingredients they use in America BECAUSE CHINA DOESN'T APPROVE OF THOSE CHEMICALS, they have been deemed unsafe for the Chinese public.

I was mildy interested in your opinion on the topic until about this point...

You are so blinded by your bias as to completely miss the fact

Now I really don't care what you think.
Hope this doesn't spoil your day but why does every argument have to take a personal twist?
Disparage me? I think not.

I am oppressed by the same government you are and to attack me is exactly why people will never really be able to stand up and demand their rights.
We are divided and always will be.
The public arena is filled with "know it all's" that attack others, turn people off, lie, exaggerate and misrepresent the topic so the public bickers amongst themselves.
I am telling my opinion and what the facts declare and I am making no judgements against you - only laying out information...pro and con. Sorry if I insist on seeing both sides of an argument. It is a curse.
I have a grasp on what is going on here and I'm able to see the bigger picture which requires some new laws and a paradigm shift but it is not impossible, if we were in agreement.

Saddest thing is that we ALL are but you will not allow the negative and inconvenient facts to enter into the equation, to be presented as they NEED TO BE and so we are again...divided and in chaos.

We can make the laws if enough of us get together and demand they be legislated.
If there are enough loyal fans of this farm they will not have a problem either as long as people get together and defend them. We too often let "politics run it's course" when we need to get in there and "set the course."
Not scream it is time to overthrow the government.

Your thinking has stopped at a certain point.

It does not go beyond griping and swiping

to unifying and solving.

You have no answers that I can see.
I don't think you even know what the question is.

reply to post by kalamatas

The sale of one mislabeled package of cheese? And did they actually sell to nonmembers? GIven they were already under scrutiny once, I don't think they'd be so lax about selling outside a contract.

That is why the warrant was for PAPERWORK they are going after the "Contracts" also that is why the charge is CONSPIRACY again they are going after the cow-share contracts by calling it a "Conspiracy" to evade the FDA regulations.

reply to post by soficrow

It's Global Monopoly and damn the stupid humans.

...The only hope is if the Libertarians and Lefties work together against Global Corporate rule.

YES, YES, YES!!!!

We are actually all after the same thing a decent life (and chance) for the ordinary Joe Blow not slavery to the Corporation.

I couldn't agree more. It is the blasted Banker/Corporate MSM that keeps everyone riled up so we do not see that truth.

Even the far "Religious Right" has "Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them" - Matthew 7:12.

I really do not think the rank and file of the left or right has a problem with "Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime." - attributed to Confucius.

I also do not think any one has a problem with getting rid of corrupt or bumbling bureaucrats that just make matters worse. This situation being a great example.

As one lady, a single Mom who has a contract to Rawesome for her goats said, Why is the county wasting all this man power and time (over a year for the "Sting") on a couple of farmers who have not hurt anyone when there are violent crimes, drug dealing, murders, theft and mugging, going completely out of control????

California is close to bankrupt and they are focusing on THIS????

As you said this proves it is all about "Global Monopoly and damn the stupid humans."

reply to post by Blaine91555

Hopefully by now people have mentioned that the premise of this thread is not true?

That company has been operating without any licenses, permits or inspections since 2007. They have had many warnings and will not stop. ....

The fight has nothing to do with milk. The fight has to do with whether two people can enter into a private legal CONTRACT!

In previous battles between Farm-to-Consumer and the FDA, the FDA has stated "There is no fundamental right to freedom of contract." [p. 27]

This is exactly the same thing as you and some friends leasing a bit of land from a farmer and planting a garden and sharing the bounty. AND YES vegetables are regulated and are slated to become as regulated as milk in the next year or so.

Safer Fruits and Vegetables: FDA Aims to Set Production Standards Production Standards include what water you can use, what fertilizer, what seeds.....


The fight is whether the government has the right to "Regulate" every aspect of a person's life including what food he eats and what contract he can enter into. Again the FDA has decided that humans do not have the RIGHT to determine what they eat. They state it in less inflammatory language but the meaning is the same.
"There is no 'deeply rooted' historical tradition of unfettered access to foods of all kinds."

We are already hearing rumblings about how the GOVERNMENT SHOULD be stepping in to determine what food a child eats, how much longer before that applies to all of us not just children?



If this fight is lost the next step is government regulations governing how you manage your backyard garden because THAT is the ultimate goal. The entire food supply under the control of the Ag Cartel. The Ag Cartel (IPC) via the World Trade Organization and their other fronts, OIE and FAO have already written lots and lots of "Good Agricultural Practices" and Congress just gave them the greenlight to saddle American farmers with those practices in the form of regulations.


Rosa Delauro's bill HR 875 contained:

"in any action to enforce the requirements of the food safety law, the connection with interstate commerce required for jurisdiction SHALL BE PRESUMED TO EXIST."

In Wickard v. Filburn the Supreme Court justices unanimously ruled against the farmer. The government claimed that if Mr. Filburn grew wheat for his own use, he would not be buying it — and that affected interstate commerce.

So the legal right for the government to stick their nose in your garden has been upheld by the Supreme Court. This "Right" needs to be overturned and this is a skirmish in that battle.

Originally posted by eLPresidente
Government can't do jack squat to prevent everybody from eating what they want to eat, these are fear tactics and they're not winning, they're pissing off the people even more.

They could've actually tested the milk and if it came out bad, they have all the right to dump it. Why dump good milk?

Raw milk is actually safe to consume if the source is well contained (grounds and cattle). They'll never stop me from consuming raw milk.

Actually they can.

As a restauranteur I know that if your coolers are not to a certain temperature inspectors will pour bleach over all of your fish or whatever food you have there... so you cannot sell it.

Why? Because they can.

reply to post by crimvelvet


From your first link. Foods can be proved vital to LIFE and comply with the 5th. I think it can even be proved someone can live on milk alone for many years, if not indefinitely...so it is essentially LIFE giving.
LIBERTY? If drinking what you want whether that be Johnnie Walker or raw milk is not liberty...what is? I know a few people who have died from the scotch so who is protecting who?
And PROPERTY? My food is my property an essential piece of it, along with shelter and fuel. So it actually complies with all three of these in the 5th but I don't think this is the amendment we want anyway...Constitutional scholars anyone?

The Fight for Food Freedom

Growing numbers of people in this country are obtaining the foods of their choice through private contractual arrangements such as buyers' club agreements and herdshare contracts.

FDA's position is that the agency can interfere with these agreements because, in FDA's view, there is no fundamental right to enter into a private contract to obtain the foods of choice from the source of choice.

As for the agency's contention that there is no fundamental right to obtain any food, including raw milk, here is what the 'substantive due process' clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides: no person shall "be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."

Obtaining the foods of your choice is so basic to life, liberty and property that it is inconceivable that the 'right of food choice' would not be protected under the Constitution but FDA is saying "No".

And a good lawyer could fight all of these assertions...
They clearly were not looking hard enough for the answers!

FDA's Views on Freedom of Choice

Here are some of FDA's views expressed in its response on 'freedom of food choice' in general and on the right to obtain and consume raw milk in particular:

1. "Plaintiffs' assertion of a new 'fundamental right' to produce, obtain, and consume unpasteurized milk lacks any support in law." (???)

2. "It is within HHS's authority . . . to institute an intrastate ban [on unpasteurized milk] as well."

3. "Plaintiffs' assertion of a new 'fundamental right' under substantive due process to produce, obtain, and consume unpasteurized milk lacks any support in law."

4. "There is no absolute right to consume or feed children any particular food."

5. "There is no 'deeply rooted' historical tradition of unfettered access to foods of all kinds."

6. "Plaintiffs' assertion of a 'fundamental right to their own bodily and physical health, which includes what foods they do and do not choose to consume for themselves and their families' is similarly unavailing because plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to obtain any food they wish."

FDA's brief goes on to state that "even if such a right did exist,

it would not render FDA's regulations unconstitutional because
prohibiting the interstate sale and distribution of unpasteurized milk
promotes bodily and physical health."

"There is no fundamental right to freedom of contract."

We need a good attorney to represent the peoples case.

Now about that Supreme Court.....

Originally posted by neonitus
reply to post by eXia7

 

they did, though its much safer to drink pasteurised milk. you want to drink raw milk, go ahead

That's the whole point - those who want to drink raw milk are being turned into criminals. The choices are beling eliminated, with a view to only 'allowing' us to eat poisoned food.

I DO NOT CONSENT.

Funny how this country regulates us into servitude yet does business with other countries that do not and expects us to compete with them. Ok, that's pretty weird. So if I am not allowed to fish unless I have a $10,000 license and a $200,000 boat and am willing to submit myself to numerous inspections and limits on my takings, then how again am I going to compete with the guy that can go out on a boat he built, without a license, without inspections, with no limits other than the size of his boat? And he receives all the praise while I'm condemned as a fish killer.

Strange world: where everybody follows different rules but plays the same game.

HOnestly, I don't even think god could make this game work. That's why it's constantly adjusted. It's why people are silenced. It's why they breed for obedience. It's why we must fight it.

reply to post by newcovenant

Actually they can.

As a restauranteur I know that if your coolers are not to a certain temperature inspectors will pour bleach over all of your fish or whatever food you have there... so you cannot sell it.

Why? Because they can.

And if his brother wants your location for HIS business or if he dislikes you or he was bribed he will pour the bleach over all your food, give you a bad rating and lie on the paperwork. He may even come back and do a "spot check".

AND there is not a blasted thing you can do, especially if he has only singled you out and it is his word against yours.

That type of bureaucratic bullying happens all the time. I have run into it several times. It is not whether you meet the regulatory standards it is who you know and who you bribe.

Welcome to the United Soviet States of AmeriKa. Different not in type but only in name and degree... An oligarchy in charge and petty bureaucrats to make life miserable for ordinary citizens.

reply to post by newcovenant

reply to post by crimvelvet


From your first link. Foods can be proved vital and comply with the 5th...

You did a much better job of getting the point across than I did and also ferreted out more info.

Thank you very much.

That is what ATS should be about!

DENY IGNORANCE!

reply to post by crimvelvet

That type of bureaucratic bullying happens all the time. I have run into it several times. It is not whether you meet the regulatory standards it is who you know and who you bribe.

Yes, I know that happens... but it is hardly the norm. I agree it happens a lot. Too often.

People are prosecuted all the time for illegalities if they can be proved and sued or drummed out of a job. It really depends on the culture of the area, and the department, and their regional connections, and who they answer to, if anyone and how regularly.

You must admit these regulations have done in many cases what they set out to do.
Discouraged irresponsible vendors from selling spoiled products. Saved lives.

You want regulations for bankers and air traffic controllers but not your food producers and sellers?
That would be suicide.

reply to post by crimvelvet


Thank you for the information but you presented it very well.
Cheers! And yes thats what ATS (maybe everything) is all about.

Originally posted by jonnywhite
Funny how this country regulates us into servitude yet does business with other countries that do not and expects us to compete with them. Ok, that's pretty weird. So if I am not allowed to fish unless I have a $10,000 license and a $200,000 boat and am willing to submit myself to numerous inspections and limits on my takings, then how again am I going to compete with the guy that can go out on a boat he built, without a license, without inspections, with no limits other than the size of his boat? And he receives all the praise while I'm condemned as a fish killer.

Strange world: where everybody follows different rules but plays the same game.

HOnestly, I don't even think god could make this game work. That's why it's constantly adjusted. It's why people are silenced. It's why they breed for obedience. It's why we must fight it.

edit on 5-8-2011 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)

I got this email. What do you think? Concerning this milk and many related issues.

The 26th amendment -granting the vote to 18 year-olds - took only 3 months & 8 days to be ratified. Why? The people demanded it. That was in 1971...before computers, before e-mail, before cell phones.

Of the 27 amendments to the Constitution, seven took 1 year or less to become the law of the land...all because of public pressure.

AMENDMENT
Congressional Reform Act of 2011

1. No Tenure / No Pension. A Congressman collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when they are out of office.

2.. Congress (past, present & future) participates in Social Security. All funds in the Congressional retirement fund move to the Social Security system immediately. All future funds flow into the Social Security system, and Congress participates with the American people. It may not be used for any other purpose.

3. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan, just as all Americans do.

4. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.

5. Congress loses their current health care system and participates in the same health care system as the American people.

6.. Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the American people.

7. All contracts with past and present Congressmen are void effective 1/1/12. The American people did not make this contract with Congressmen. Congressmen made all these contracts for themselves.

Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career.
The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators,
Ours should serve their term(s), then go home and back to work.

If each person contacts a minimum of twenty people then it will only take three days for most people (in the U.S. ) to receive the message. Maybe it is time.

Now this has to do with Congressmen and term limits but you get the idea.
Why can't we do something like this with this issue as well?

reply to post by newcovenant

You must admit these regulations have done in many cases what they set out to do.
Discouraged irresponsible vendors from selling spoiled products. Saved lives.

You want regulations for bankers and air traffic controllers but not your food producers and sellers?
That would be suicide.

Actually I would like to see some sort of check mechanism on the petty hitlers. Too often the corruption goes all the way to the top, like Mike Taylor, Monsanto's lawyer, being head of the FDA.

I have been wrestling with an idea for a check placed on the bureaucracies. Perhaps a review of the "accused petty hitler's" by the people of the area and NOT his boss?

Haul the restaurant inspector who is playing games in front of a tribunal of owners AND customers???

We are guaranteed a trial by jury for all criminal matters and anything over $20 in civil matters but you would never know that was the fact today.

The JURY has the right and duty to judge not only the person by the LAW.

Unfortunately we have devolved into a society where a bureaucrat is now the judge and jury and the accused never even sees the true legal system.

That is one of the reasons why "Licenses" are now used for everything. By obtaining a "License" you unknowingly gave up your right to a trial in many many cases. It is turns our RIGHTS one by one into privileges granted by the state. Removal of a "License" by a bureaucrat can then be used as punishment and the intent of the Constitution, for us to have access to a jury of our peers, is completely removed.

The right of jury nullification

William Penn may have thought he had settled the matter. Arrested in 1670 for preaching Quakerism, Penn was brought to trial. Despite Penn's admitting the charge, four of the 12 jurors voted to acquit. The judge sent the four to jail "without meat, drink, fire and tobacco" for failing to find Penn guilty.

On appeal, however, the jurors' action was upheld and the right of juries to judge both the law and the facts -- to nullify the law if it chose -- became part of British constitutional law.

It ultimately became part of American constitutional law as well,

but you'd never know it listening to jury instructions today almost anywhere in the country. With only a few exceptions, juries are explicitly or implicitly told to worry only about the facts and let the judge decide the law. The right of jury nullification has become one of the legal system's best kept secrets.... prorev.com...

Yeah I do think these things out.

edit to add I love the Great Pyrenees, we use a guard donkey.