USDA inspector Paul Flanagan converses with Scott, the local police detective, as one of Amos Miller’s workers walks past, during Monday’s federal inspection of the farm.
No one really wanted to be there at the end of the Pennsylvania farm driveway this morning—neither the two agents from the U.S. Department of Agriculture in ill-fitting bulletproof vests under their sport shirts, nor the armed local police detective who accompanied them, nor the Amish owner of the farm, Amos Miller.
The agents tried to be engaging, clearly hoping Miller would at least temporarily abandon his tenacious resistance to the USDA subpoena that eventually led to a federal court order allowing today’s search. Miller, however, wasn’t about to do anything to accommodate the government representatives.
After a little verbal dancing in the driveway, during which the agents encouraged Miller to show them around, and Miller demurred and told the agents to do what they needed to do under their federal court order, the agents spent about two hours walking through Miller’s production and storage facilities, taking notes and photos. At one point, Miller requested the agents wear gloves before handling wrapped meat packages.
Before the agents departed, a little after noon, the lead agent, Paul Flanagan, suggested to Miller that, in Flanagan’s judgment, Miller was likely violating federal meat laws that prohibit re-selling custom-slaughtered meat. He suggested Miller could most easily solve the problem by having cattle and other animals slaughtered and butchered at a USDA-inspected slaughterhouse. Flanagan handed over to Miller a variety of forms and instructions on complying with USDA regulations.
Under USDA regulations, meat from animals not slaughtered in facilities regularly inspected by USDA agents can only be consumed for “personal” use. It must be labeled “NOT FOR SALE,” and the meat isn’t supposed to be sold, traded, or given away.
Miller has argued that his farm’s meat, slaughtered and butchered on his farm, can be sold directly to members of his private association.
It wasn’t clear when the agents left around mid-day Monday what might happen next— if or when they might be returning, or whether they might be recommending some regulatory action against Miller. According to the court order issued nearly two weeks ago by U.S. District Court judge Edward Smith, the USDA has fairly wide discretion—its agents are supposed to complete their inspection “with reasonable promptness.” Then, they can return within 90 days of completing their inspection “to determine whether any violations found have been cured.” Then, “within ten days of the completion of all activities authorized in this Order, the United States shall file a brief report concerning the status of this matter. If defendants have complied with this Court’s Order and the administrative subpoena, this matter will be dismissed.”
Liz Reitzig, who was on site at Miller’s Organic Farm, provided significant information for this post.
Thank you both for this report. Witnesses are crucial during this period. This is a big reason why Sam is in so much hot water… no witnesses. (http://www.davidgumpert.com/2783-2)
Here is a little something that really shows some humanity. This week when our CDFA inspector arrived for some routine training and testing of our milk management team…..I remarked to him, what are you here for today? He said….just some routine training and testing for Sampler Weigher Certs…I said, super. I then shared that my wife always becomes nervous when sh sees our state inspectors.
The very warm and respectful conversation then turned to the terrible police shootings that have been occurring nationally. He said..”….you know this can happen when the government goes to far and the people react….he said….just don’t start shooting at me” I then expressed my respect for him and his work that he does with us at OPDC.
This just goes to show, every one is feeling it. The tension, the stress, the question about authority and government pressures and the societal relief valve.
Thanks, Mark. I found it interesting that the USDA inspectors showed up today at Amos Miller’s farm wearing bullet-proof vests (and accompanied by a gun-toting local detective). I have to think that federal regulators in general are being advised by higher-ups to take this extra precaution, because this particular encounter at an Amish farm was about as low-risk as they come these days.
But as your inspector indicated, the authority figures are not only feeling the stress, but very much understanding that it comes at least partly from the oppressed among their subjects. Much urban policing has been racially charged/motivated. And much rural policing (of farmers) has been economically motivated, to protect corporate interests. Now the authorities are worrying that even the most peaceful of their targets might rise up.
Being a good inspector is about being a good and kind person. Compassion, humanity, walking a mile in the other persons shoes. It is about listening to how your words will be received before they are ever spoken. Wearing a bullet proof vest is a harsh message unto itself. It shows fear, it shows lack of compassion, it shows a desire to isolate oneself from another. It shows how limited the tool box of communication that the inspector has. If there was ever a doubt about safety….the entire inspection should have been cancelled. There is literally nothing worth dying for in the court order about food issues…nothing.
An inspector wearing a bullet proof vest is very telling about where the heart of the inspector actually is. Prior to any high risk inspection there should be a threat and risk assessment. If they did not do a threat assessment….they screwed up. Risk assessments are simple affairs. They include a smart investigator building a relationship with the Millers to build trust and get a sense of true reality…not the imaginary one. It is called old fashion humble compassion and humility. The government has a crappy reputation for this. Waco, The Branch Davidian’s and David Koresh come to mind. If we want peace we must live in peace and practice it.
It is my hope that this recent police shooting national earthquake will shake the blue line and force a cultural change. The good cops must not stand with the bad. Training must be enhanced and less lethal force must become the way of the future and solid warm interpersonal communications must be the guiding foundation for anyone in a position of authority.
All lives matter. All farmers matter. Peace.
Mark – I don’t see much difference in Healthcare and EMS workers wearing gloves and masks, as your well know. I could take it personally, as a patient, and tell them I have nothing communicable, but they will not remove the gloves. It’s standard protocol. Like bulletproof vests, it doesn’t send a message, we are the ones to interpret it kindly. Working with the public, service workers assume they need a barrier. I agree.
I found it an awful shortsighted decision for Dallas law enforcement to purchase gear only rated for handgun shots. One policeman interviewed said that bullets from automatic weapons pierced the vests like butter. A different purchasing decision could have saved lives, my guess.
I’mean glad public servants are caring for themselves.
Standard protocol for law enforcement….NOT standard protocol in the inspection of food! If the inspector for my raw milk showed up in a bullet proof vest, it WOULD send the message he is fearful, doesn’t trust me and I would be offended and think he was crazy!
I think these events are apples and oranges. This inspection was resisted. And, our interpretation is always under our control. Some might ferl it shows their vulnerability, their humanity.Others might take offense. The way we interact with our world is an inside job. I imagine Amos might have made some new customers. His amiable nature set the tone of this inspection, my guess.
Personally, I think their wearing of vests and bringing firearms is indicative of how they view their relationship with small farmers and food producers. They wouldn’t show up at a Kellogg facility that way. They view big food producers as the norm and their relationship with them as cooperative. They view small farmers as rogue agents and their relationship as antagonistic. They are literally at war with small farmers and are dressing and acting accordingly.
Perhaps WE should all start wearing bullet proof vests when interaction with public SERVANTS. We’ve forgotten who we are and given away our powers.
There is history related to concern about the safety of food inspectors.
Meat inspectors shot to death at California sausage factory
http://lubbockonline.com/stories/062300/nat_062300040.shtml#.V4XN46IenT9
Michele, maybe because of the incident you refer to, more inspectors who serve warrants and such are accompanied by local law enforcement. But I’ve never seen the inspectors themselves wearing bulletproof vests, and I’ve unfortunately seen a good number of these situations. If you look at the video I linked to of the various inspections at Vernon Hershberger’s farm, there are law enforcement personnel around, but none of the inspectors has special protection. This is something new, very likely related to the spate of mass shootings, which culminated in Dallas last week.
Current events should inform our law enforcement agencies. Arming and armoring themselves is the sensible thing to do when dealing with volatile people in potentially volatile situations. Inspectors had nothing to fear from Miller but they wisely considered who else might show up in the throng of protesters at the end of the driveway to interfere with them. Simply reading blogs like this one and the irrational and often pugnacious anti-law enforcement rhetoric in the comments section should be enough to justify precautions. It only takes one unbalanced fanatic on the sidelines with a deer rifle to wreak mayhem, as we have seen all too often. If inspectors had arrived alone and entirely vulnerable only to be maimed or killed by one of your lunatics would you not today be blaming the inspectors for carelessness in not protected themselves and the innocent people around them? You must admit some of you people get pretty agitated and some of your talk gets pretty crazy, even threatening. Law enforcement made the right call; they protected themselves, they protected Miller and everyone went home safe and sound this time.
Dallas Grieving,
Indeed. law enforcement agencies with the aid of “The Establishment” have made their bed…now they have to sleep in it. If I were in their shoes I’d be leery as well. Clearly the Miller family didn’t feel the need to wear bulletproof vests and I doubt it very much that they felt protected by the presence of armed law enforcement officers wearing bulletproof vests.
Those inspectors had no business on the Miller farm to begin with and the judge is in error for capitulating to the government agency’s request for an inspection. Their presence wearing bulletproof vests while accompanied by armed police officers is more a reflection of desperate strong-arm government tactics gone out of control.
Any governing body that thinks it can constructively rule over peaceful people at the point of a gun and the excessive rule of law fail to completely grasp the implications of their oppressive acts that clearly serve to violate human dignity and freedom. They know damn well that they are pushing the limit of human tolerance, hence the need for bulletproof vests. If history is any indication of the eventual outcome, then they are in for a rude awakening.
As Solzhenitsyn experienced living in both Russia and the United States, “I have spent all my life under a Communist regime, and I will tell you that a society without any objective legal scale is a terrible one indeed. But a society with no other scale but the legal one is not quite worthy of man either
Dallas Grieving, I’ve heard a few people from the regulator/enforcement side express this view–that they have to be real careful dealing with the crazy farmers and their supporters. And they point to supposedly provocative comments on this blog. Still, I have yet to witness a single questionable action by a farmer or supporters in any of the many inspections or court proceedings that have occurred over the last decade. Maybe I’ve missed something. But any provocation I’ve witnessed seems to come from the regulator/enforcement side. As just one example, take a look at the trailer about events leading up to Wisconsin farmer Vernon Hershberger’s prosecution.
I have to correct the statement..it was not an automatic weapon. It was simply a high powered weapon on par with an average deer rifle. Auto weapons are highly illegal. Our police should be protected at least against the power of a deer rifle.
Why are inspections even necessary unless there’s a claim from a wo/man who have first hand knowledge and can testify under oath that they have been directly harmed somehow. Other than that, no one has the right to come onto your private property. No victim, no crime. Period. Of course, if you obtain licenses, etc….then you’ve consented to be under their jurisdiction. This is why they want licenses, registration, etc….for EVERYTHING and you’ve complied.
Govtmint’s only job is to protect and secure private property. Learn common law and initiate your local assembly now. This is how to free ourselves.
http://1stmichiganassembly.info/index.php/handbook/steps-to-setting-up-your-state-general-jural-assembly-gja-and-settling-your-state
The gov is all of our enemies.
Lisa,
I have been thinking about Obamas speech and the national problem of police shooting policy.
In my view the problem rests in police shoot policies.
The law and legal precedent is clear. An officer has broad deference on his own interpretation of what a serious or immediate threat is. If he feels threatened, whether a gun is present or not….he can shoot to stop that threat. Unfortunately….police training only has one target when a gun is used….it is nearly always fatal shot to the core of the mass of the body.
If I was Obama….I would announce the following:
1. The Wild West and police shooting policy is done. We are now entering a human era of humanity that protects police and also preserves life.
2. Immediately, declare that all fatal shooting events that include any federal, or state local or other police agency will be investigated by the FDI to assure that the shooting followed newly created federal use of force guidelines.
3. Immediately require that all officers that carry a gun are required to be trained on new use of force guidelines.
4. New Federal Use of Force Guideline would include mandatory initial use of less lethal weapons in the event of escalating threat. This is different than current use of force policies. Ballistically discharged Tazer systems actually work better than bullets to stop physical activity in close quarter situations. Tazer systems completely immobilize subjects through paralysis of muscles and rarely cause fatal injury. Bullets must cause death before physical movement stops. Currently, police are authorized to continue shooting until the threat stops. With a fired tazer…the threat stops immediately.
5. Provide funding for additional technical development of higher powered ballistically powered tazers that have a video recorder on them to record all events as the tazer is pointed at subjects.
6. Require that all police have holsters that have retaining devices to assure that their own weapons can not be used against them.
7. Assure that all police holsters have use indictors that show a broken seal when used or weapon is drawn. This will deter the use of lethal force and casual or rampant drawing of weapons unless absolutely appropriate and retrain the physiologic response that must be retrained for use of less lethal force weapons. Any broken seal would need to be reviewed by a supervisor. Cops hate paperwork.
8. Announce that police officers and all other agencies that are armed will no longer be allowed to investigate themselves and that all use of lethal force will be reviewed by a DOJ FBI team that will enforce less lethal force policies.
If police want to stop being shot…they have to stop shooting.
Live by the sward and you might die by it as well.
This would go a long way to stopping this madness. On a personal note….the hiring of officers that do not display compassion and a sense of personal security must become the standard of care in hiring. If we continue to hire gun slingers and wild west dreamers that are fearful, paranoid or insecure…all police will continue to be at risk. It will be only after we change the culture of shooting to fix things…will we have peace and peace officers. A peace officer is first and foremost a “peace” officer.
When his work is done…people should not be dead.
How do we pay for this….well that’s easy. The municipalities pay massive amounts of money each year for bad shootings. These costs will be saved.
Lastly….hire more female police. Then tend to shoot fewer people and bring more compassion to the scene. The data is clear about this.
I am sickened by the good cops protecting the bad. It is time that police culture change and the blue line be moved. The good cops must not be rewarded for standing with the bad.
Why do I know about this or care so much about all of this?…I saw this and experienced first hand for 17 years as a EMS field paramedic. I retired when I got sick and tired of picking up their brutalized bloodied pieces and being threatened by them for showing compassion to victims.
David,
If you look at the mission and directive of nearly any state agricultural enforcement department agency, part of that mission is to support and maintain fair market conditions. What does that mean? Well…it can mean all sorts of things. It means to assure fairness among competing brands, assure safety, assure that label claims are fair and not taking advantage of some unfounded use. In general it means to assure a level playing field for the market players.
However, when it comes to raw milk…that mission appears all screwed up when seen from the view of the raw milk consumer or the farmer. Especially in states where raw milk is illegal or suppressed.
Think about all the forces in the processed organic and also conventional markets that pressure their state agencies to get rid of raw milk so that market pressures will be lighter.
Even in CA we see uneven application of regulatory agency pressure and regulation when it comes to raw milk. If raw milk is kept on the farm ie “Cow Shares”…it is untested, unregulated, uninspected and fairly cheap at less than $4 per gallon in several places….but….put it into a store or farmers market and it is intensively tested, regulated, inspected, insured and etc….and becomes very expensive. So goes reality.
This comes to mind when considering recent heavy raw milk enforcement in Texas where even though raw milk is legal to sell on the farm…it is seen as a criminal event to coordinate delivery to drop points.
I know that this delivery issue has everything to do with market protection and political pressures from established market players. Containment of raw milk to the farm is key or else…it will become out of control and market share will be lost.
Just a little reality perspective. Fair or not…it is reality, at least for now.
Food fighting….isn’t it wonderful in the 21st century!!
This doesn’t say if he read the warrant. That is the first – read the warrant and restrict them to looking where, touching what, and dealing with ONLY what the warrant includes. Lock everything else up. Don’t volunteer info – like he did(n’t).
Brad? re : questioning the Warrant. Have you ever suffered through a search of your home, by armed uniformed agents of the State? If you have, it’d be most interesting to hear about it … please provide case file number/ all the paperwork details/ ideally a scan of that document, so I can check it out. If you haven’t such experience … then “you’re talking through your hat” as they say down in Dixie. Advice from armchair civil libertarians about confronting the Fascisti who arrive in a Homeland-Security-frame-of-mind, reveals your naivety … it’s dangerous. …. more palaver out of the Detax/ Patriots for Profit / Erwin Rommel School of Law. You’ll recall Rommel lost. Jesus Christ called those guys “vipers” and he promised that Christians do have the power to handle them.
This was legal advice from the FTCLDF lawyer GW – stop making yourself superior by demanding things to meet your satisfaction. ALL knowledge comes from acceptance by your empirical senses. To gather some of that knowledge second-hand is not a bad plan. That is can be inaccurate is always a possibility – but this all sounded sound – the lawyer’s advice.
Brad? so please give me something in the empirical realm – drawn from your own experience in such a highly-charged, downright dangerous situation. Otherwise, I’m going to have to categorize you like I did with most of the herd of stray cats in the DeTax thing … another kibitzer, safely ensconced in his armchair, well-insulated by fibre-optic cable from dealing with real people.
I guess this is what our “leaders and regulators” consider a better option than what the Amish Community and other responsible farmers and ranchers are doing: http://complete-health-and-happiness.com/the-agriculture-industry-is-mutilating-cows-by-drilling-holes-in-them/
You have to keep scrolling to make sure you’ve seen/read the entire article because there are a RIDICULOUS amount of ads on that site.
“How Congress Allowed Vaccine Manufacturers to Dismantle the Constitution (in One Thousand Words or Less)”
https://vactruth.com/2016/07/19/vaccine-makers-dismantled-constitution/
Indeed, how vaccine, chemical, drug and food manufacturers… have used the socialist, utilitarian rational to dismantle human rights and undermine human dignity worldwide.
Ken. The author of this link suggests a vaccine was found to contain pig DNA. But, the citation used by the author refers to this vaccine as containing DNA homologous to a virus that can cause disease in pigs (a ‘pig’ virus if you will). While the vaccine contamination by this circovirus is obviously a cause for concern, to claim that the vaccine contained ‘pig DNA’ instead of ‘non-specific viral DNA’ is clearly a mistake. To conflate this with the rights of certain religious groups to avoid the consumption of ‘anything pig’ is, therefore, also in error IMHO.
John
John,
Rotavirus vaccines are cultured on/in monkey, cow and pig tissue and FDA officials are suggesting that they don’t know why the vaccine became contaminated with the porcine circovirus 1 or PCV1???
The presence of pig DNA in the vaccine is a given and so is cow DNA including their respective retroviruses that can cross species barriers and whose small virion size does not allow 100% assurance of there filtration.
http://www.virology.ws/2010/03/29/deep-sequencing-reveals-viral-vaccine-contaminants/
Ken. As reported in your link, the PCV1 DNA in the vaccine was shown to be virion DNA. I believe PCV1 is a single stranded DNA virus. Therefore, I stand by my first comment. The contamination was viral DNA, and not DNA from the pig genome.
John
John,
So where do you think that single stranded viral DNA came from? It certainly didn’t materialize out of thin air. Viral contaminants in vaccines originate from the tissue being used to culture the virus specific to the disease in question. These contaminating viruses are referred to in the following article as garbage viruses, and “among the garbage viruses, the small circular single stranded DNA viruses such as PCV1 deserve special attention as they are so widespread in the human and animal populations”.
http://www.i-sis.org.uk/Viruses_and_Virus_Nucleic_Acid_Contaminate_Vaccines.php
That being said, what about the cell matter used to culture the vaccine? Where pray tell did that go?
Viral vaccines are derived from culturing viruses with cell matter derived from live and/or deceased hosts including cows, monkeys, pigs, chicken embryos, and human diploid cell etc. The above cell matter is combined with toxic chemicals like Thimerosol (mercury), formaldehyde, aluminum hydroxide solvent detergents and a variety of other substances, before being injected or administered orally into the human body. Are you suggesting with your comment that the cell matter is not present in the vaccine preparation?
If so, then your narrow focus on PCV1 DNA in an attempt to undermine the credibility of the article is disingenuous to say the least.
Ken. My point is when this author uses a citation to support her ideas, that the citation should actually do that. If she has other citations to support her idea of vaccines containing pig DNA, these should have been used.
John
David
(such as PCV1) is my emphasis in the quote I included in my last comment.
If Amos Miller is not yet being represented, it might not hurt to look into this.
https://www.thomasmore.org/