Politics and Law Enforcement vs Farm-to-Consumer Sales

If you've really done your homework on how many small farmers have been harassed by government regulation, this article won't be news to you. But if you're new to the scene, you may be skeptical, but believe me, it's overwhelming how often this stuff goes on.

This is an editorial by David Gumpert appearing in "The Nation". It's about the attack on raw milk, which I'm afraid to even post here, because it's a red flag to Big Brother. But there, I've said it! Lol...it also expands on several examples of using undercover agents to infiltrate buying clubs as well (that deal with said dairy products, which I don't mess with under MI law, save the cheese, which is legal to sell when aged an appropriate length of time).

Don't we have more important issues to deal with at both the state and federal level than interfering with consumers buying from farmers directly (or even indirectly, as through me) when the consumer understands exactly what they're purchasing? Buying local is totally accountable and transparent. Buying food at a grocery store is a big mystery--but the government gives it a seal of approval, and that's supposed to make it safe, right? HA!

Here's a snippet from the article...come on! Was the guy really so dangerous that they needed all the drama? Those Mennonites...they're violent, I hear!!! Intimidation is the name of the game, and with the moles they're planting, they're trying to divide us by eliminating trust:

What are these cases really about? It might be argued that, individually, these are mostly harmless cases of low-level bureaucrats gathering evidence by posing as consumers. But taken together, something more is definitely going on.

For one thing, the use of undercover agents tends to be accompanied by other questionable investigative techniques. Meadowsweet Farm has filed suit against the New York Department of Agriculture and Markets, alleging in part that a search warrant used by the agency before filing its undercover-agent-inspired complaint was deficient because of its open-ended time frame and vague language about the amount of force that could be used in confiscating evidence.

The week before Mark Nolt's trial, a caravan of law enforcement vehicles arrived unannounced at his farm, carrying eleven PDA employees and four state police officers. The officers secured a perimeter around the farm to prevent any neighbors, including Nolt's elderly father who lives down the road, from gaining entrance. They handcuffed Nolt and took him away in a police car to be arraigned without allowing him to alert his family. And while a search warrant limited the officials to confiscating milk processing equipment, the authorities also took Nolt's expensive cheese-making equipment and cream separator.