See other Dead Constitution Articles
Title: Feds tell court they can decide what you eat - 'Plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to obtain any food they wish'
Source:
WND
URL Source: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=153133
Published: May 14, 2010
Author: Bob Unruh
Post Date: 2010-05-14 13:10:26 by Rotara
Ping List: *North American Union* Subscribe to *North American Union*
Keywords: None
Views: 316
Comments: 23
Attorneys for the federal government have argued in a lawsuit pending in federal court in Iowa that individuals have no "fundamental right" to obtain what food they choose. The brief was filed April 26 in support of a motion to dismiss a lawsuit filed by the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund over the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's ban on the interstate sale of raw milk. "There is no 'deeply rooted' historical tradition of unfettered access to foods of all kinds," states the document signed by U.S. Attorney Stephanie Rose, assistant Martha Fagg and Roger Gural, trial attorney for the U.S. Department of Justice. "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," the government has argued. WND has reported several times on fed crackdowns on producers of raw milk for friends and neighbors, including the recent case when agents arrived to inspect a private property belonging to Dan Allgyer in Pennsylvania at 5 a.m. The incident was followed by a report a few days later that documented a proposal pending in Congress that critics say would do for the nation's food supply what the new health-care reform law has done for health-care resources. "S. 510, the Food Safety Modernization Act of 2010, may be the most dangerous bill in the history of the U.S.," critiqued Steve Green on the Food Freedom blog. "It is to our food what the bailout was to our economy, only we can live without money." The plan is sponsored by U.S. Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., who explains the legislation "is a critical step toward equipping the FDA with the authorities and funding it needs to regulate what is now a global marketplace for food, drugs, devices and cosmetics." Now it's statism on our plate! Mark Levin's manifesto – 'Liberty and Tyranny' – provides the antidote to its growing stranglehold His website explains, "The legislation requires foreign and domestic food facilities to have safety plans in place to prevent food hazards before they occur, increases the frequency of inspections. Additionally, it provides strong, flexible enforcement tools, including mandatory recall. Most importantly, this bill generates the resources to support FDA food-safety activities." The proposal cleared the U.S. House last year but has been languishing in the Senate because of a full calendar of projects. It creates a long list of new requirements for food-producing entities to meet the demands of the secretary of agriculture. It is expected to be the subject of discussion in coming days. The Iowa case alleges the federal restrictions on raw milk are a violation of the U.S. Constitution, according to a report at Natural News. The federal attorneys want the case dismissed. "The interest claimed by plaintiffs could be framed more narrowly as a right to 'provide themselves and their families with the foods of their own choice,'" the government document states. But the attorneys say that right doesn't exist. "The FDA essentially believes that nobody has the right to choose what to eat or drink," said the Natural News site, which explains it covers topics that allow individuals to make positive changes in their health, environmental sensitivity and consumer choices. "You are only 'allowed' to eat or drink what the FDA gives you permission to. There is no inherent right or God-given right to consume any foods from nature without the FDA's consent." The Natural News report continued, "The state, in other words, may override your food decisions and deny you free access to the foods and beverages you wish to consume. And the state may do this for completely unscientific reasons – even just political reasons – all at their whim." The report cited an increasing level of frustration on the part of the federal government because of tactics including buying "cow shares" in which a consumer drinks milk from a cow he partly owns, or "buying clubs." "This arrangement drives the FDA absolutely batty because it bypasses their authority and allows free people to engage in the free sales of raw dairy products produced on small family farms," Natural News said. The report blames the aggressive campaign against raw milk on large commercial dairy interests, "because it threatens the commercial milk business." The reason cannot be safety, the report said, since a report from the Weston A. Price Foundation revealed that from 1980 to 2005 there were 10 times more illnesses from pasteurized milk than from raw milk. The federal government attorneys say the FDA's goal is to prevent disease, and that's why the "ban on the interstate sale of unpasteurized milk" was adopted. The attorneys conceded that states ordinarily are expected to regulate intrastate activity but noted, "it is within HHS's authority … to institute an intrastate ban as well." Natural News reported the ban could be seen as violating the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which leaves to states all powers not specifically designated in the Constitution for the federal body. In fact, according to the Wisconsin State Journal, lawmakers there have adopted a bill, with the governor's support, that would allow farmers to sell raw milk directly to consumers. The move puts Wisconsin in position to be the 20th state to allow direct sales of raw milk. Another handful of states allow retail sales. Read Joseph Farah's commentary on the issues of natural foods, in today's column: "Got milk? You bet – from Mexico"
Poster Comment: "There is no 'deeply rooted' historical tradition of unfettered access to foods of all kinds," states the document signed by U.S. Attorney Stephanie Rose, assistant Martha Fagg and Roger Gural, trial attorney for the U.S. Department of Justice. It is our DUTY to put these rabid dogs down, wherever we find them.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Rotara (#0)
May Rose, Fagg & Gural choke on a wad of bean curds.
This is key to the entire point, and if you are aware of other data fits right into the total control agenda. And it is not just the dissolution of the free rights of the common man or woman but the total control over everything you say, think, do, and consume. That is why the so-called draconian food safety bills put even your private back yard garden under Federal Regulation and Control. If the current pending bill passes Organic Farming and Gardening are on the road to becoming illegal in the "Land of the "One of the least understood strategies of the world revolution now moving rapidly toward its goal is the use of mind control as a major means of obtaining the consent of the people who will be subjects of the New World Order." K.M. Heaton, The National Educator
When they put a food muzzle on this beast, I'll take them seriously.
ping
Want to look at a new way to make some moola?click here and enter code 4d6a55744e5451354e7a673d-2
She reminds me of Peter Lorre - except he was better looking.
"One of the least understood strategies of the world revolution now moving rapidly toward its goal is the use of mind control as a major means of obtaining the consent of the people who will be subjects of the New World Order." K.M. Heaton, The National Educator
Then we fly the bird high and proudly and continue to have gardens. At some point people have to learn to stand and fight and stop justifying everything with "but but but...they might hurt me...".
MapQuest really needs to start their directions on #5. Pretty sure I know how to get out of my neighborhood.
deleted
The relationship between morality and liberty is a directly proportional one. "You've got to put right and wrong above legal and illegal. Because when tyranny becomes law, rebellion becomes duty; and it is not rebellion at all, it is submission to the higher law that our government is in rebellion to. We're not the rebels, they're the rebels."
You mean besides the deeply rooted historical tradition of unfettered access to foods of all kinds? Where do they dig up these clowns anyway?
MapQuest really needs to start their directions on #5. Pretty sure I know how to get out of my neighborhood.
That is one of the dumbest arguments I ever read. But then, those ARE government agents so what can anyone expect? I guarantee you their arrogance is exceeded only by their ignorance and don't-want-to-know attitude.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. You said it !!! As a matter of fact ... "they" are going to make the people violate even though many will try to comply ... compliance ain't what "they" want ... "they" want prisoners and worse.
"The smallest of frauds such as Santa Claus are perpetrated upon children by criminals in order that the largest of frauds such as the FEDERAL RESERVE may be had upon them as adults."
We don't have left and right ... we have left and further left ! The two parties are colluding to attain one agenda !
"The smallest of frauds such as Santa Claus are perpetrated upon children by criminals in order that the largest of frauds such as the FEDERAL RESERVE may be had upon them as adults."
Heaven forbid a farmer drink his own cow's milk without proper pasteurization. What a complete crock of shit.
It is better to be hated for what you are, than loved for what you are not. - Tommy The Mad Artist.
deleted
The relationship between morality and liberty is a directly proportional one. "You've got to put right and wrong above legal and illegal. Because when tyranny becomes law, rebellion becomes duty; and it is not rebellion at all, it is submission to the higher law that our government is in rebellion to. We're not the rebels, they're the rebels."
Let this be an end to the matter--McCain_Rocks in his head has spoken (to the poster who calls himself Mad Dog). Here it (as it would say in the Jargonizer). The fact of the matter is that S510 is a bipartisan bill. If it were a bad bill then the Republican Party would have nothing to do with it. Instead, 50% of the co-sponsors of the bill are Republican. So much for your "fraud conservative" accusation, which is really nothing more than a poor attempt to shut me up because you are mentally incapable of having a rationale debate on any subject. You are emotionally unstable and mentally crippled; challenged if you will, which is likely why you spend so much time on the internet. Also, it is a fact that the USSC has made it clear that the federal government has the authority to regulate food. The measures found within this legislation are common sense and needed in our post 9/11 world. This has nothing to do with limited government (code word for anarchy) and/or the tenth amendment and everything to do with the health and safety of tens of millions of Americans from those terrorists that want to do us harm. Your quoting a known leftist homosexual like Thoreau says a lot about you. You are obviously a liberal pole smoker and considering your immature behavior on this forum, you are a likely child molester as well. McCain_Rocks posted on 2010-05-14 14:34:27 ET Reply Trace This is Mad Dog's reply to McCain_Rocks in his head. I thought it was hilarious, and I thought that because M_R thinks there is no bad legislation as long as anyone with an R after his name votes for it. LMAOAY!!!!!!!!!!!! The repukelican'ts are as culpable for the state of this nation as the demonRATS are whore. R does NOT mean CONSERVATIVE b!tch. McCartoon you are nothing but a clumsy bad parody. You are nothing but a poser FRAUD. You aren't any kind of American conservative, what you are is a statist fascist POS. Don't give me that cr@p that USSC supplants the US Constitution you simpering whore. This has EVERYTHING to do with limited gooberment you vile statist whore. Here's a little heads up for you FRAUD, American conservatives believe in OBJECTIVE TRUTH and you know what you vile statist whore? THE OBJECTIVE TRUTH is the OBJECTIVE TRUTH no matter who states it. You never had the b@lls to say that vile sh!t to my face you vile statist whore c^nt, and you still don't. IF I was a litigious person I'd own your worthless a$$. But what am I going to do with a stolen shopping cart filed with rags and garbage and a broken down cardboard box? The worst "punishment" that I could ever come up for you would never be as bad a you having to look at yourself in the mirror every day for the rest of your worthless life. Goldi I only pinged you so you would be aware of what this vile POS is calling other posters, which exposes both this vile creep, and this site, to legal action over his continued libels. I don't sue people, but I'd be happy to beat his foul a$$ down. Not that a COWARD such as he would ever dare be face to face with anyone and say such things. Mad Dog posted on 2010-05-14 15:11:56 ET Reply Trace http://libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=289200&Disp=17#C17
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Lord Levin, a comrade in arms with Scum Hannity, is tainted in a myriad of ways. He's a whiny Jew-Lawyer ... which is enough to dissuade me. (And you too it appears). Right gatekeepers are working hard right now to keep conservatives in the status quo pen ... [Oh, we'll do better next time] ... which is the same bullshit the public has swallowed for 100 years. These are third wave republicraps ... propagandists published by pimps.
"The smallest of frauds such as Santa Claus are perpetrated upon children by criminals in order that the largest of frauds such as the FEDERAL RESERVE may be had upon them as adults."
deleted
The relationship between morality and liberty is a directly proportional one. "You've got to put right and wrong above legal and illegal. Because when tyranny becomes law, rebellion becomes duty; and it is not rebellion at all, it is submission to the higher law that our government is in rebellion to. We're not the rebels, they're the rebels."
"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," the government has argued. The scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses' seat. Isn't it amazing how these hypocrites in black dresses talk out of both sides of their yaps? We have no right to put what we want to put into our bodies, but if we want to take a pair of scissors and stab it into the skull of our children as they are being born, on the pretext that it is the mother's right to do with her body as she wants, THEY'RE ALL FOR IT! [ bible.cc/isaiah/10-24.htm / kingjbible.com/exodus/1.htm ]
"...as long as there..remain active enemies of the Christian church, we may hope to become Master of the World...the future Jewish King will never reign in the world before Christianity is overthrown - B'nai B'rith speech http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/luther.htm / http://bible.cc/psalms/83-4.htm
Yes, well, as you're very aware my friend, the Master of the Universe and my soul is Jesus Christ the Lord God Almighty. And He sure as spit never commanded ANY of us to lay down our lives willy knilly outside of preaching His Gospel. These sausage smoking luciferians have known that I simply won't roll over for their namby pamby bullshit and will ALWAYS stand for a live and let live approach. Of course, that pisses them off to no end and they feel compelled to push me and mine up to the wall. And, of course, I just laugh in my knowledge and whenever practical/feasible/mandatorty I send them packing off to their never never land of eternal bummerhood...
LOL You are and always have been a great friend. See you on the other side ??
Just checkin to see if you're still awake. I was thinking of starting a tasteless, yet somewhat humorous, images thread. You in? btw, I missed you seeing you for awhile...glad to see you back! More on the topic: Raw milk battle reveals FDA abandonment of basic human right to choose your food (Natural News) The Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund (FTCLDF), an organization whose mission includes “defending the rights and broadening the freedoms of family farms and protecting consumer access to raw milk and nutrient dense foods”, recently filed a lawsuit against the FDA for its ban on interstate sales of raw milk. The suit alleges that such a restriction is a direct violation of the United States Constitution. Nevertheless, the suit led to a surprisingly cold response from the FDA about its views on food freedom (and freedoms in general). In a dismissal notice issued to the Iowa District Court where the suit was filed, the FDA officially made public its views on health and food freedom. These views will shock you, but they reveal the true evil intent of the FDA and why it is truly a rogue federal agency. The FDA essentially believes that nobody has the right to choose what to eat or drink. You are only “allowed” to eat or drink what the FDA gives you permission to. There is no inherent right or God-given right to consume any foods from nature without the FDA’s consent. This is no exaggeration. It’s exactly what the FDA said in its own words. You have no natural right to food The FTCLDF highlighted a few of the key phrases from the FDA’s response document in a recent email to its supporters. They include the following two statements from the FDA: “There is no ‘deeply rooted’ historical tradition of unfettered access to foods of all kinds.” [p. 26] “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.” [p.26] There’s a lot more in the document, which primarily addresses the raw milk issue, but these statements alone clearly reveal how the FDA views the concept of health freedom. Essentially, the FDA does not believe in health freedom at all. It believes that it is the only entity granted the authority to decide for you what you are able to eat and drink. The State, in other words, may override your food decisions and deny you free access to the foods and beverages you wish to consume. And the State may do this for completely unscientific reasons — even just political reasons — all at their whim. This has all emerged from the debate over whether raw milk sales should be legal. But the commonsense answer seems obvious: Of course raw milk should be legal! Since when did the government have any right to criminalize a farmer milking his cow and selling the raw, unpasteurized milk to his neighbor at a mutually-agreeable price? The U.S. government’s secret agenda to eliminate raw milk Raw milk has been in the spotlight recently as defenders of the food are constantly battling with state and federal authorities over the freedom to buy and sell it. At the national level, the FDA has been on a ruthless crusade to eliminate all sales of raw milk everywhere. Lately, the agency seems to have shifted its tactics from attacking raw milk dairy farmers directly to going after raw milk “buying clubs” and “cow-share” programs, which effectively bypass the draconian laws in many states by establishing private contracts between individuals. In a cow-share program, you buy a share of the cow’s produced milk, and you pay a cost of the cow’s upkeep. It’s sort of like CSA shares for farm veggies, but with cow’s milk instead of veggies. This arrangement drives the FDA absolutely batty because it bypasses their authority and allows free people to engage in the free sales of raw dairy products produced on small family farms. But why is the FDA hell-bent on stopping raw milk from being sold in the first place? Think about it: What is it about this particular whole food that has regulators working overtime to make sure you don’t drink it? It certainly has nothing to do with food safety, as the FDA commonly claims is its reason for opposing it. Raw milk’s track record of safety is phenomenal, and all legitimate studies indicate that it’s actually less prone to harbor harmful bacteria than the pasteurized stuff (which is all dead, modified milk anyway). According to a Weston A. Price Foundation (WAPF) report, between 1980 and 2005, there were ten times more illnesses from pasteurized milk than there were from raw milk. And most of the reports that link illness outbreaks with raw milk provide little or no evidence that raw milk was even the culprit. But apparently the facts don’t really matter to the FDA (is anyone surprised?) because the agency continues to repeat false talking points about how raw milk is inherently dangerous and that drinking it is “like play Russian Roulette with your health”. Big Dairy behind push to eliminate raw milk The real reason why the FDA opposes raw milk is because Big Dairy opposes raw milk. Just like Big Pharma, Big Dairy has worked very hard behind the scenes to steer FDA policy in its favor. And according to some recent reports, Big Dairy is one of the primary forces trying to eliminate raw milk because it threatens the commercial milk business. Recently in Massachusetts, for example, the state’s Department of Agricultural Resources (MDAR) has been targeting raw milk buying clubs that purchase raw milk from rural dairy farms and have it delivered to urban drop-off points where many of the customers live. Raw milk sales are legal in Massachusetts as long as they are done at the farm, and the state has long tolerated buying clubs, which are convenient for customers and technically perfectly legal. But this situation now seems to have changed. MDAR recently sent cease-and-desist letters to four buying clubs even though there is no Massachusetts law that prohibits their existence. When club members challenged the legitimacy of the warnings, MDAR decided to propose a new regulation to specifically outlaw buying clubs. (They just can’t stand the fact that people are buying raw milk, can they?) Get this: Scott Soares, a Massachusetts legislator who is friends with the MDAR commissioner, held a preliminary meeting in advance of the May 10th proposal hearing to discuss the matter with interested parties. Fifteen educated and passionate consumers and farmers of raw milk showed up to challenge Soares, who ended up revealing to them that “large dairy producers” had contacted him to push for raw milk restrictions. To make matters worse, it was revealed that Soares failed to follow proper protocol by not opening a docket to keep a record of all interactions relating to the proposal. So not only did Soares reveal that he’s basically bowing to political pressure from Big Dairy by supporting the restrictions, but he’s also violating proper legislative procedure in the process. So what we have here is a classic case of a large and powerful industry pushing government regulators to outlaw competing products so that it can monopolize the market. It’s the same thing that Big Pharma does in getting the FDA to destroy nutritional supplement companies. But now it’s happening with raw milk, too. What’s next? Will all farmer’s markets be outlawed because the veggies haven’t all been irradiated or pasteurized? As usual, it’s all about the money, and as you follow the money trail all the way up to the federal level, you find the same thing happening everywhere: At the FDA, USDA, FTC and so on. U.S. government regulators have become monopoly market enforcers for Big Business, and they won’t let anything get in their way… not even personal health freedoms or just basic access to food. I’m sensing a Ghandi moment coming on here. Somebody is going to have a powerful public demonstration against tyranny by drinking raw milk in the same way that Ghandi led his followers to harvesting salt. People have a natural-born right to real food, and the FDA is violating human rights by attacking producers of raw milk. Unconstitutional position of the FDA It’s not really news to the folks in the natural health community that the FDA opposes personal health freedoms, but according to the FTCLDF, the FDA’s recent response to its lawsuit is one of the agency’s boldest statements yet about how it views health freedom in America. It practically turns the FDA into a dictatorial Gestapo-like agency whose mission is to destroy the U.S. Constitution and deprive people of their natural rights. Not only does the FDA think it has the power to regulate interstate trade; it also thinks it can regulate intrastate trade (which means buying and selling within state borders). In fact, the agency made this very clear on page 6 of its dismissal when it wrote, “It is within HHS’s authority…to institute an intrastate ban [on unpasteurized milk] as well.” This is the FDA trying to run rampant over States’ rights. The federal government, after all, isn’t satisfied to exercise control over the limited powers granted to it by the U.S. Constitution — it wants to overthrow the tenth Amendment and dictate rules, regulations and laws that the states are being forced to follow. This is blatantly unconstitutional. The Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution forbids the federal government from intruding on the laws of individual states, and is only allowed to wield powers expressly granted to it by the Constitution (powers granted by the People, in other words). There is no power granted to the federal government to ban the sales of raw milk. I’ve read the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights, and I never saw it mentioned in there. The very idea, by the way, would have seemed bizarre (and downright stupid) by our nation’s founders, many of whom actually operated farms and drank raw milk themselves. According to the FTCLDF suit, the FDA is clearly operating outside Constitutional authority by forbidding raw milk from being transported across state lines from states where it is legal to sell it. And for the FDA to arrogantly announce that it has the authority to ban intrastate raw milk sales shows just how tyrannical and oppressive the agency has now become. The FDA, bluntly states, has become an enemy of the People. It is taking away the rights that your forefathers helped protect (often with their lives). The FDA is destroying what your fathers and grandfathers fought for in World War II. It is attempting to terrorize the raw milk producers of America and run them out of business through a campaign of threats and intimidation. This is the agency that’s supposed to be working for the People? Give me a break… Even private contracts aren’t a fundamental right, according to the FDA But it gets even worse. On page 27 of the dismissal, the FDA also states that Americans do not have a fundamental right to enter into private contractual agreements with one another, either. Huh? Are you kidding me? Buying clubs, cooperatives and community supported agriculture programs (CSAs) all rely on private contractual agreements in order to operate. People contract with each other to obtain clean, healthy food from the sources of their choice without government intrusion. But now the FDA is saying that people don’t actually have this right. To enter into such a private contract to purchase food, milk or even water is a violation of federal law, the FDA now claims. You are just a subject of the King, you see, and you have no rights. You must eat and drink what you are told. You must behave in a way that is allowed by your King. You have no rights, no protections and no freedoms. You are a slave, Neo. The “substantive due process” clause of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, however, assures people of this right when it states that no person shall “be deprived of life, liberty or property, without due process of law.” And being able to make personal food choices without having to obtain permission from Big Brother is definitely included under this clause. But the FDA — aw, heck, all of Washington for that matter — doesn’t honor the U.S. Constitution in any way, shape or form. The document is little more than a tattered piece of American history according to the Nazi nut jobs running federal agencies today. They are no more likely to respect the Constitution as they are to leap from their desk job chairs and magically transform into flying elephants. But all hope is not lost… there are things you can do to fight for your freedoms. What you can do to protect food freedom According to David Gumpert from The Complete Patient, raw milk is a proxy issue that really addresses food freedom at large. Whatever is decided about raw milk will set a precedent for everything else. That’s why it’s so important to support raw milk freedom whether you drink milk or not (I don’t drink milk, but I support raw milk freedoms nevertheless). Not only is legalized raw milk beneficial to small, family farmers who are able to maintain livelihoods because of it, it also supports the local food economy. It’s also, by the way, a whole lot healthier than pasteurized milk! On January 28, 2009, Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX) introduced HR 778, a bill that would end all federal restrictions on interstate traffic of raw milk. It’s along the same lines as the current lawsuit which challenges the constitutionality of such restrictions in the first place. You can read the entire bill at the following link: (http://www.ftcldf.org/docs/HR_778_I…) The FTCLDF has a petition page where you can contact your Congressmen and urge support for HR 778. You can even ask your Senators to cosponsor it. Please support this effort by signing this online petition. Even more urgent than this is the need to express your opposition to a “food safety” bill going before the U.S. Senate called the “FDA Food Safety Modernization Act”. Also known as S. 510, this bill, if passed, will drastically increase the FDA’s power over food and make it very difficult to obtain natural, unprocessed foods of any kind. It would give the FDA completely power to irradiate, fumigate, pasteurize or otherwise destroy every item you consume, from fruits and vegetables to dairy products. Remember how I said that the FDA (wrongly) thinks it has the power to regulate intrastate trade? Well S. 510 would specifically grant the agency this power. The FDA would then have the power to destroy all small, local farming, gardening or dairy operations in your home town, even if your state expressly defends your rights to engage in such activity. Can you imagine a SWAT team of FDA agents showing up at your door because you grew organic broccoli and sold some at the weekend farmer’s market without fumigating it with poisons first? That’s what’s coming to your home town, everywhere across America. S. 510 is the final version of H.R. 2749, which was passed last summer by the House of Representatives. There’s still time to stop it, but we need your help. So please sign the petition linked above. I know sometimes it seems like the politicians aren’t listening, and for the most part that’s true, but a massive outcry against this attempted takeover of food is sure to get their attention and may even force them to back down. You can read all about both bills at the following link: (http://www.ftcldf.org/news/news-foo…) You can also contact your Senators by visiting this link: (http://www.opencongress.org/people/…) Join the Raw Milk Drink-In! The Organic Consumers Association, by the way, is holding a Raw Milk Drink In in Boston today (May 10, 2010). Here’s the announcement from the OCA. Please go join the drink in if you live near Boston! Suzanne the Cow on Boston Common for “Raw Milk Drink In” Raw Milk Enthusiasts Slam Proposed State Ban on Raw Milk Buying Clubs Press Conference Precedes 10 AM Public Hearing at Massachusetts Department of Agricultural Resources MOOVE OVER CORPORATE COWS! WE WANT PASTURE NOT PASTEURIZED! THE MDAR IS UDDERLY RIDICULOUS! MDAR’S RAW MILK BUYERS’ CLUB BAN IS BULL! MDAR SHOULDN’T COWTOW TO BIG AG! BOSTON – On Monday, May 10, 2010, for perhaps the first time since the park was used, prior to 1830, as a pasture, a cow will graze on Boston Common. The cow is Suzanne, a beautiful pasture-raised Jersey who gives healthy raw milk through Eastleigh Farm in Framingham, MA. The occasion is a gathering of raw milk enthusiasts and dairy farmers who will bring a cow to the Common for a “Raw Milk Drink In” and then gather at the State House for a press conference. The raw milk rally comes as the Massachusetts Department of Agricultural Resources (MDAR) attempts to restrict the delivery of raw milk to thousands of consumers throughout Massachusetts. Earlier this year, the MDAR issued a cease and desist order to four raw milk buying club drivers who were delivering the milk to customers in urban and suburban areas of the state. Who: Raw milk cow, farmers and consumers. What: Photo opportunity with raw milk cow, “Raw Milk Drink In” and press conference. When: 8 am Cow & “Raw Milk Drink-In,” Boston Common 9:20 am Press Conference, State House 10 am Public Hearing, Massachusetts Department of Agricultural Resources 2 pm Cow leaves Boston Common Where: Boston Common – Adjacent to Brewer Fountain, then Statehouse Speakers available for interviews: Doug Stephan, Raw Milk Dairy Farmer, Owner Eastleigh Farm in Framingham, MA, (bringing the cow). David Gumpert, author of The Raw Milk Revolution: Behind America’s Emerging Battle Over Food Rights. Max Kane, a Wisconsin buying club owner who is currently fighting contempt of court charge brought by the WI Dept of Agriculture for his refusal to reveal his sources of Raw Milk. Mark McAfee, the owner of Organic Pastures Dairy Co., the largest raw dairy in the country, based in California. More Information: Over three million Americans now prefer organic raw milk and raw milk dairy products over pasteurized milk because of its superior nutrition and disease fighting qualities and because it comes from small, local producers who pasture their dairy cows, rather than keeping them confined all day and all year in dairy feedlots on huge, disease-ridden factory farms. There have been no reported cases of raw milk-related illnesses in Massachusetts in over ten years. Alexis Baden-Mayer, Political Director for the Organic Consumers Association says, “We don’t need a ‘new solution.’ Up until this proposed ban, everything has been fine. If there’s any change to Massachusetts regulations, it should be a change to make it easier — not harder — for us to get the healthy organic raw milk and dairy products we want. This law would deny us our right to choose what we eat and drink.” Learn more at http://www.organicconsumers.org/raw-milk May 10, 2010 http://republicbroadcasting.org/?p=8436 =============== The FDA essentially believes that nobody has the right to choose what to eat or drink. You are only “allowed” to eat or drink what the FDA gives you permission to. There is no inherent right or God-given right to consume any foods from nature without the FDA’s consent. This is no exaggeration. It’s exactly what the FDA said in its own words. You have no natural right to food The FTCLDF highlighted a few of the key phrases from the FDA’s response document in a recent email to its supporters. They include the following two statements from the FDA: “There is no ‘deeply rooted’ historical tradition of unfettered access to foods of all kinds.” [p. 26] “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.” [p.26] ==================== And they sit in the temple of God ["Know ye not that ye are the temple of God?"] shewing themselves that they are God. Liars, thieves, murderers, just like their father, the devil. They have deceived their own selves. Back to reality: Genesis 1:29 And God said, "See, I have given you every herb that yields seed which is on the face of all the earth, and every tree whose fruit yields seed; to you it shall be for food." I suspect this idea that we do not have a "fundamental right to their own bodily and physical health, which includes what foods they do and do not choose to consume...." is part of the silent Holy War which is being waged against the church. I have long suspected this is also at the root of the "mysterious" death of the honeybee population: "....When the Israelites finally entered the Promised Land of Canaan, settling at first in the hill country and in the south, they must have found the uninhabited slopes covered with virgin forest of oak and terebinth, storax and hawthorn, wild olive and arbutus, and every kind of native shrub and flower. And there, to the joy of these desert-weary people, they found the blessing of abundant wild honey with its promise of ample food for their flocks — its promise of fruitful life..... For other peoples of the Middle East, the image of an ideal place flowing with milk and honey has long been associated with paradise. For instance, the paradise described by Allah in the Koran — the eternal garden of joy promised to the faithful and obedient in their afterlife — possesses not only rivers of pure water and wine, but "rivers of fresh milk" and "rivers of pure honey."...... ...National pride could surely motivate a people to expand the "milk and honey" figure into hyperbole. If the paradise of one nation possessed springs and streams of milk and honey, the better paradise of another nation would naturally possess pure rivers of them. The better the place, the better the god — that would be the implication, in order to bolster the national identity of being the select people of a greater god....." www.umc.sunysb.edu/surgery/m&h.html Today, it's no milk but FDA big agro-milk; tomorrow it may be "NO milk for you!" Promises to Israel, which is the church, are under siege and threat of theft: "....Blessings of the gospel. Isaiah 55:1 Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters, and he that hath no money; come ye, buy, and eat; yea, come, buy wine and milk without money and without price. Joel 3:18 And it shall come to pass in that day, that the mountains shall drop down new wine, and the hills shall flow with milk, and all the rivers of Judah shall flow with waters, and a fountain shall come forth of the house of the LORD, and shall water the valley of Shittim. .... [Shittim: (sh-t`-m), in the Bible, last place in which the Israelites encamped before reaching the Holy Land. It was E of Jericho. An alternate form is Abel-shittim. The valley of Shittim of the Book of Joel is not the same place. :} encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/Shittim ] Wealth of the Gentiles. Isaiah 60:16 Thou shalt also suck the milk of the Gentiles, and shalt suck the breast of kings: and thou shalt know that I the LORD am thy Saviour and thy Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob...." http://www.bible-topics.com/Milk.html Gentiles can also be translated "nations, heathens," but Zionists interpret it to mean non-Jews. In fact, THEY, and not we Christians, are of the "gentiles" [heathens] of whom the church shall suck the milk [can be figurative, i.e. "wealth"] of. [God's doing; not mine. They can be a part of that promise anytime they want to repent and accept Christ, not for the purpose of "sucking the milk" of anyone, for we are to love our neighbor as ourself, but for their own salvation. ] Isaiah 60 is written to the church, and in particular to Christian America. See verse 14: All the sons of those who afflicted you, Shall come bowing to you, And all those who despised you shall fall prostate at your feet; And they shall call you The City of the Lord, Zion of the Holy One of Israel. [see Revelation 3:9 Indeed I will make those of the synagogue of Satan, who say they are Jews and are not, but lie - Indeed I will make them to come and worship before your feet, and to know that I have loved you....12He who overcomes, I will make a pillar in the temple of my God...I will write on him the name of My God (Christ) and the name of the city of My God, the New Jerusalem....and I will write on him my new name (Christian). ....2 Samuel 7:10...and the children of wickedness will not afflict us anymore, as beforetimes. Gal.3:16-29 And if you are Christ's then are you Abraham's seed and heirs to the promise.] Keep up the good fight.
"...as long as there..remain active enemies of the Christian church, we may hope to become Master of the World...the future Jewish King will never reign in the world before Christianity is overthrown - B'nai B'rith speech http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/luther.htm / http://bible.cc/psalms/83-4.htm
Brother, it's even better to 'see' you, too ! You ALWAYS BLESS ME NO MATTER WHAT, like SO MANY OTHERS HERE. So, did you think that before June of 2010 that we'd already have these frequent and predictable-destructive-tacit-admissions from the Feral Baalzareserve Klan ? Hey, my faith is bounding so I'm thinking when I see you at the 4um Heavenly Valley Reunion, we could have a beer and compare notes...ehehe
"There is no 'deeply rooted' historical tradition of unfettered access to foods of all kinds," states the document signed by U.S. Attorney Stephanie Rose, assistant Martha Fagg and Roger Gural, trial attorney for the U.S. Department of Justice.
#2. To: Rotara (#0)
"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," the government has argued.
Free Slave". This is part of the total control regimen of Corporate Hegemony, headed by the Rotchilds, Rockefuckers, Carnalgies, etc., .... "The 'little people' need to be regulated for their our own good."
#3. To: Original_Intent (#2)
#4. To: Rotara, *Agriculture-Environment*, *libertarians*, *Jack-Booted Thugs*, *Humor-Weird News* (#0)
#5. To: Jethro Tull (#3)
When they put a food muzzle on this beast, I'll take them seriously.
#6. To: Original_Intent (#2)
#7. To: Rotara (#0)
#8. To: Rotara (#0)
"There is no 'deeply rooted' historical tradition of unfettered access to foods of all kinds," states the document signed by U.S. Attorney Stephanie Rose, assistant Martha Fagg and Roger Gural, trial attorney for the U.S. Department of Justice.
#9. To: Rotara (#0)
"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," the government has argued.
Lord Acton
#10. To: SonOfLiberty (#6)
At some point people have to learn to stand and fight and stop justifying everything with "but but but...they might hurt me...".
#11. To: Eric Stratton (#7)
Oh yeah, Levin's support for the Patriot Act, doing away with Habeus Corpus and Posse Comitatus et al. also "provided the antidote" to its growing stranglehold.
#12. To: Rotara (#0)
#13. To: noone222 (#11)
#14. To: Rotara, christine, Dakmar, Jethro Tull, Cynicom, all (#0)
(Edited)
I thought Goldi banned people for suggesting that other posters were, or might be, "child molesters." But check out that screed about how, if it had been a bad bill the Republicant's wouldn't have voted for it. Of course it was "bipartisan," they're almost all cut from the same cloth. McCain_Rocks in his head just hasn't figured it out yet.
Lord Acton
#15. To: Eric Stratton (#13)
I'm referring primarily on the right and insinuating those like Lord Levin.
#16. To: noone222 (#15)
#17. To: Rotara (#0)
(Edited)
"There is no 'deeply rooted' historical tradition of unfettered access to foods of all kinds," states the document signed by U.S. Attorney Stephanie Rose, assistant Martha Fagg and Roger Gural, trial attorney for the U.S. Department of Justice.
#18. To: AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt (#17)
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams 
#19. To: Rotara (#18)
“It has been said, 'time heals all wounds.' I do not agree. The wounds remain. In time, the mind, protecting its sanity, covers them with scar tissue and the pain lessens, but it is never gone.” ~ Rose F. Kennedy
#20. To: wudidiz (#19)
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#21. To: Rotara (#20)
“It has been said, 'time heals all wounds.' I do not agree. The wounds remain. In time, the mind, protecting its sanity, covers them with scar tissue and the pain lessens, but it is never gone.” ~ Rose F. Kennedy
#22. To: Rotara (#18)
#23. To: AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt (#22)
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest