OT: Mennonite Farmer Arrested for Selling Raw Milk to Other Mennonites
I mostly lurk but I thought this story was important. If it is very
off-topic, dear moderators, you can remove it.
ami moore chicago
This is a long article about a man arrested for selling raw milk to
private customers. Read to the end and find the relationship again
between Hillary and Monsanto.
The milk here in MN is by Kemp's and is labeled rBGH Free.
The Criminalization of Raw Milk A Mennonite Farmer is Hauled Away By
On April 25, 2008, in Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, Mark Nolt, a
Wenger Mennonite (Horse and Buggy Mennonite) dairyman, threatened for
months with arrest for selling raw milk without a permit was removed
from his property by state troopers.
Jonas Stoltzfus, a friend, fellow farmer, and Church of the Brethen,
was asked by Mr. Nolt to speak for him, and said of the raid
yesterday - "Six state troopers and a man with the Pennsylvania
Department of Agriculture trespassed onto his property, and stole $20-
25,000 of his product and equipment."
Mr. Stoltzfus explained that Mr. Nolt did not have a permit
because "he chose to turn his permit back in because it did not cover
all the products he was selling. He felt he was being dishonest
selling stuff that was not covered by the permit. He is a man of
"According to reports from neighbors and the Farm-to-Consumer Legal
Defense Fund, several officials of the Pennsylvania Department of
Agriculture participated in the raid, and while Mark was being
transported by police car to the courthouse, PDA officials
confiscated $20,000 to $25,000 worth of dairy products and production
equipment. Neighbors reported the farm had been closed and that a
large group of officials had gathered, with videos prohibited."
"Mr. Nolt was told that people had gotten sick from eating his food,
but no one ever came forward and no proof was ever offered."
"This is a Gestapo raid," Jonas Stotlzfus said, "complete with state
troopers, raiding a hard-working farmer selling milk to friends and
customers. And his customers ARE his friends." Mr. Nolt
Mr. Stoltzfus said of Mr. Nolt, "he is not going to stop [selling raw
milk] til he is ready to stop. He is the equivalent of that little
black lady in Alabama who wouldn't go to the back of the bus. He is
doing the same thing, he won't go to the back of bus." Mr. Stoltzfus
said "she got arrested for that and so did Mr. Nolt. He ignored [the
threat] and kept on selling. He is a courageous man." Mr. Stoltzfuz
said "Mark believes it is his right to sell, according to the
constitution, just like it was Rosa Park's right to sit wherever she
wanted on the bus. Same deal. There is nothing in the constitution to
prevent Mr. Nolt from buying and selling, especially to his friends,"
Mr. Stoltzfus said.
Stoltzfus commented that Mr Sheridan of the Pennsylvania Department
of Agriculture (Stoltzfus does not have the spelling and believes he
is with the licensing division) used to work for Dean Foods and
Hershey Foods, big corporate operations, and that Sheridan
was "jealous that farmers make a better product" and called the raid
by Mr. Sheridan "a vendetta."
This case is similar to that involving Meadowsweet Dairy LLC in New
York, in that both Pennsylvania and New York allow raw milk sales,
but adamantly oppose the sale of other raw dairy products.
Mr. Nolt was doing things the way his community has for generations,
selling milk straight from his cows to those he knows.
Mr. Nolt contends that the regulations have not been approved by the
legislature and shouldn't apply to him because he is selling directly
to consumers, via private contracts that are outside the purview of
the state, making a privilege out of a right he believes he has - the
right to private contracts."
The permitting issue, ostensibly for food safety, is contradicted by
a look both at raw milk itself and at its competition, corporate
milk - pasteurized and often from cows injected with rBGH.
Four issues stand out:
1. INDEPENDENCE of farmer and customers
Raw milk: Farmer sell raw milk from their own cows, to neighbors and
friends at a price farmers set themselves, paid by people who value
their product, without a middleman.
A growing number of people prefer raw milk (unpasteurized milk),
considering it not only safe but healthier than pasteurized milk
because it is still rich in pro-biotics not killed off by
Farming communities have consumed raw milk for generations. The
exchange between farmers and neighbors play a central part in the web
of relations sustaining those communities. Yet raw milk is banned in
Corporate milk: Dairy farmers sell their milk to milk "producers" who
pasteurize it, may add things to it, bottle it, distribute it, often
at great distances. Dairy farmers must accept a price set by others,
in a large competitive market. Nothing in the process promotes local
"...The system of influence and control..is highly skewed in favor of
the corporate and financial system." - Vincente Navarro, (Professor
of Health and Social Policy, John Hopkins U.).
"[For years, m]illions [in California] consumed commercial raw
milk, ... not a single incidence was reported. During the same
period, there were many instances of contamination in pasteurized
milk, some of which resulted in death. [I]f we withdrew ... every
food type responsible for a case of food poisoning, there would be
virtually nothing left to eat. But only raw milk has been singled out
for general removal from the food supply.
"... the bacteria in raw milk is the healthy bacteria of lactic-acid
fermentation while the bacteria in pasteurized milk is the bacteria
of spoilage. ... Both raw and pasteurized milk contain E. coli,
normally a benign microorganism. The most likely source of the new
strains of virulent E. coli is genetically engineered soy, fed to
cows in large commercial dairies. If there is any type of milk likely
to harbor these virulent breeds, it is commercial pasteurized
milk. ... Children fed raw milk have more resistance to TB, scurvy,
flu, diphtheria, pneumonia, asthma, allergic skin problems and tooth
decay. In addition, their growth and calcium absorption was
superior." (In California, there is currently an effort to ban raw
"Four distinct groups of bacteria survive pasteurization....the strep
of pasteurized milk are the most frequent cause of rheumatic fever --
the most deadly disease of childhood.'" - USDA
During the Clinton administration, a new study was released "conclud
[ing] that milk from cows injected with [genetically engineered
bovine growth hormone - rBGH) increases risks of breast and colon
cancers in humans.
"rBGH poses an even greater risk to human health than ever
considered," warned Samuel Epstein M.D., Professor of Environmental
Medicine .... "The FDA and Monsanto have a lot to answer for. Given
the cancer risks, and other health concerns, why is rBGH milk still
on the market?"
Since 1986, independent scientists have expressed concern about the
lack of research on rBGH milk.
Michael Colby, Executive Director of Food and Water
said, "Monsanto 's claims that rBGH is perfectly safe have been
proven dead wrong today .... Only Monsanto is benefiting from this
drug. It's time for dairy companies to side with consumers by
adopting a policy that they will not allow rBGH, under any
circumstances, to be used by their farmers."
Epstein said: "The entire nation is currently being subjected to a
large-scale adulteration of an age-old dietary staple by a poorly
characterized and unlabeled biotechnology product which is very
different than natural milk."
In 2007 - when Mark Nolt was first arrested for selling raw milk
(natural milk) - a citizens' petition to the FDA on rBGH milk showed
30 scientific journals indicating an up-to-7-fold increased risk of
breast cancer, and an increased risk of colon and prostate cancern.
Raw milk is sold primarily through word of mouth.
Corporate milk is promoted through large, expensive ad campaigns.
The California Milk Processor Board is now targeting teens:
"Goodby, Silverstein and Partners created a page on MySpace to
promote White Gold and the Calcium Twins, a team of new fictitious
characters turned rock stars who spread their love of and devotion to
milk through music. TV spots, print ads and PR will also support the
"The Milk Processor Education Program ... is funded by the nation's
milk processors ... committed to increasing fluid milk consumption."
Raw milk is just milk. Those who buy it know that and seek it out for
On the corporate side, Monsanto continues pushing bans on labeling
rBGH-milk. Customers usually do not know they are consuming rBGH milk.
During its approval process,
"FDA scientist, Dr Richard Burroughs concluded ... Monsanto was
manipulating the [test] figures. In 1989 he was sacked after
complaining to Congress ... To deal with the ... controversy Monsanto
assembled ...PR companies ... of which [BURSON-MARSTELLER] was one."
During the Clinton administration, Monsanto employees were appointed
to run the FDA. Monsanto's rBGH - the first genetically engineered
product ever, was approved.
"[In]1994, people at the FDA [wrote] an anonymous letter to ...
Congress, [fearing] retribution ... The basis of our concern is that
Dr. Margaret Miller ... wrote the FDA's opinion on why milk from
[rbGH]-treated cows should not be labeled. However, before coming to
the FDA, Dr. Margaret Miller was working for the Monsanto company as
a researcher on [rbGH]."
In 1996, there was a press conference on rBGH's medical risks. "Given
the potential health impacts of consumption of milk and other dairy
products derived from rBGH treated cows, all such products at a
minimum be labeled so that consumers are aware of what they are
purchasing and consuming. More prudently the FDA approval of rBGH
should be withdrawn until the agency performs adequate long term
"... Wisconsin, Minnesota, California and Vermont attempted to
enforce labelling of milk produced with, and containing, this
hormone. Their efforts were thwarted by Burson-Marsteller acting on
behalf of these companies."
Burson-Marsteller has been a long-term (now campaign) advisor to
Hillary Clinton, through its CEO, Mark Penn. And Monsanto's effort to
ban labeling of the milk continues today.
Banning of labeling of rBGH milk in effect puts millions of Americans
into a human experiment with genetic engineering, exposing them to
greatly increased risk of cancers. The Nuremberg Code makes clear
that experimental subjects must give informed consent.
Mr. Stoltzfus added up losses for Mark Nolt: "Trepass on private
property, private personal merchandise stolen, being deprived of a
significant amount of hard work he and his family put together. He is
being deprived of the opportunity to market his product now, they are
throwing it away. It's a shame."
Mr. Nolt did not have a permit. He has twice lost thousands of
dollars of work or material, and faces jail.
Monsanto sells rBGH-milk associated with cancers, Clinton hired
Monsanto employees which approved their own genetically engineered
product, Hillary Clinton has been silent up to today about the risk
rBGH poses to women, PR firms strongly push the milk on all ages.
None face jail or fines for altered facts, for PR campaigns
encouraging even children to drink rBGH-milk, or for banning labeling
of it, which has put the entire US population at medical risk for
years. Monsanto, the Clintons, Burson-Marsteller and Goodby,
Silverstein and Partners are all making millions.
Mr. Nolt, released after being taken off by state troopers, refused
to accept a ride from them. He started walking. Friends gave him a
Linn Cohen-Cole can be reached at: lcohencole@...
- My MD, who eats and advocates a mostly raw all vegan diet, tells me
ANY kind of milk is complete poison and cancer/disease fuel. Vegan
anti-milk guy Robert Cohen (see notmilk.com ) says much as he
dislikes corporate agriculture and Monsanto, that raw milk is even
more dangerous. The Weston Price people seem particularly deluded
As a long time vegan, I have no dog in this fight. As a long time
libertarian I believe if you wish to purchase and consume any
properly labeled item that has been shown to shorten or risk your
life, then that is your business, not the state's. As long as you
are not risking the lives of others or infringing upon their freedom
of action and enjoyment of their own life, then you should be free to
weed yourself out of the gene pool as you see fit, in fact I STRONGLY
Where the state's interest comes into play, legitimately, is in
protecting children. Let's say you purchase raw dairy because you
are stupid and misinformed and feed it to your children and they die
as quite a few have recently, then one can say the state did have a
responsibility to regulate or restrict the sale of the "food" you
gave to your children. This is no different than the state being
able to arrest you for not having your kids in child seats. Children
are helpless and from what I observe, many adults are stupid