Monsanto’s attack on James Stewart and You

By John Wells
Food Freedom

As articles are written on what is happening to Rawesome Foods owner, James Stewart, one significant connection has been left out.

Monsanto’s former lawyer and VP, Michael Taylor, now Czar of the FDA “food safety” division, ordered the armed attacks on Stewart. He did this at the very same time Monsanto is in a fierce battle in California to stop the labeling of its proven-toxic and fertility-impairing GMOs.

On one hand, Monsanto is working to ensure that its toxic products are kept unlabeled so they continue to be unwittingly eaten, removing people’s choice; on the other, it is working to stop people like Stewart from providing real, nutritious, safe food, removing any option to their toxic products. They are going so far as to used armed force, multiple agencies, charges of felonies, and conditions in jail that are at best, ridiculously out of proportion to anything Stewart did (a missing certification for goat milk?) and health threatening.

But Monsanto got its agents in California to do much more – through their treatment of Stewart, the effort now is to label the rapidly growing food movement in the US as terrorist, and to suggest that anyone who knows they are sovereign citizens of the US (by virtue of the American revolution and the Constitution and Bill of Rights) is a danger to the United States. This would be funny if it weren’t patently unconstitutional and insane.

As one reads what is happening to Stewart, including that during his recent arrest, they forced a red armband on him indicating this natural food provider was a danger to the population, three salient facts should stand out:

  • Monsanto is behind the armed raid against Stewart, and possibly ordered all of the outrageous treatment against him in jail;
  • You are a sovereign citizen;
  • This is all over a missing certification for milk that was perfectly safe in the first place. That is, it’s a low level misdemeanor and, legally, is potentially not even the government’s business to begin with, as the food was not sold to the public but was solely for a private club.

The security forces of the US have defined a “sovereign” as a terrorist. But, what does it mean to be a sovereign citizen? (From

The word “sovereign” is defined in the 6th edition of Black’s Law Dictionary, published in 1990, as being, “A person, body, or state in which independent authority is vested; a chief ruler with supreme power; a king or other ruler in a monarchy.” Prior to the War for American Independence, the British king was the sovereign and the American people were his subjects. The war’s outcome changed all this:

The sovereignty has been transferred from one man to the collective body of the people – and he who before was a “subject of the king” is now “a citizen of the State.”

State v. Manuel, North Carolina, Vol. 20, Page 121 (1838)

Thus, the people became Citizens of their respective states. But more importantly, for the first and only time in recorded history, the people were recognized as being the true sovereigns:

It will be sufficient to observe briefly, that the sovereignties in Europe, and particularly in England, exist on feudal principles. That system considers the prince as the sovereign, and the people as his subjects; it regards his person as the object of allegiance… No such ideas obtain here; at the revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people; and they are truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects… and have none to govern but themselves…

Chisholm v. Georgia, Dallas’ Supreme Court Reports, Vol. 2, Pages

471, 472 (1793)


“This brings us to what are considered as being the rights inherent in Citizenship in America:

“When men entered into a State they yielded a part of their absolute rights, or natural liberty, for political or civil liberty, which is no other than natural liberty restrained by human laws, so far as is necessary and expedient for the general advantage of the public. The rights of enjoying and defending life and liberty, of acquiring and protecting reputation and property, – and, in general, of attaining objects suitable to their condition, without injury to another, are the rights of a citizen; and all men by nature have them.

Douglass, Adm’r., v. Stephens, Delaware Chancery, Vol. 1, Page 470 (1821)

“These are the rights inherent in Sovereign Citizenship. So long as we remained Citizens, they couldn’t be taken away from us. So the key was to take our Citizenship away from us.”

The government has given rights of personhood to corporations. Now, comes part two, the flipside. The government now is working to remove sovereign rights from real people. It does this by creating the most bizarre of faux threats to US security – Americans who are knowledgeable enough about the Constitution and common law to know we are ALL sovereign and ALL have sovereign rights. The government has defined as terrorists those who know American law and history enough to recognize the sovereignty of US citizens. Terrorism thus becomes the lever to remove sovereign citizenship and all rights.

This is occurring around food, too, as the US government attempts to remove everyone’s sovereign rights around food – thus, to life itself. In fact, the FDA is asserting in court in another raw milk case that there is no fundamental right to one’s bodily and physical health.

The pressure to get James Stewart to deny he is “a sovereign” – someone born with inherent rights – had a familiar feel to it, ringing like the scenes of black men in jail or before a lynching, being challenged, “Are you saying you are just like everyone else, boy? Are you saying you have rights like white people? Is that what you are saying?”

This treatment of anyone defending their rights around food was foreshadowed in 2009 in an article entitled, Farming: Why Obama’s government is George Wallace, Monsanto is the KKK, and we are all black children now.

There is a paradox in all this. The guy on the street who fell for Bush’s 9/11 attack and wanted us to do anything to stop terrorists is now faced with the reality of being treated as blacks once were by his own government, and of being labeled as a terrorist for defending his sovereign rights. And, those who care about civil rights have a black president responsible for appointing Monsanto’s Taylor to the FDA and remaining silent as he works to remove the most fundamental of human rights around food itself.

Everyone in the country is facing what blacks once did – no rights at all, as the government describes those who are standing up for the sovereign rights of citizens (the very thing that made this country unique and truly great) as “terrorists.”

The nation may have felt stunned by the National Defense Authorization Act, pushed by both major parties, because it allows anyone to be taken away and permanently detained without charge or trial. James Stewart’s case makes clear that the lives of everyone are threatened, for Monsanto is trying to tie a rapidly growing national food movement (which has grown in large measure as a reaction to Monsanto itself) to “terrorism” and in this way, is attempting to remove everyone’s sovereign rights as citizens.

James Stewart is each and every one of us. One can’t say, “But I wouldn’t sell goat milk,” and be safe from false arrest and imprisonment. The Food Safety Modernization Act that Monsanto designed and which gives it such immense power includes home gardens and could potentially include your kitchen.

James Stewart has just become a national icon in the battle against Monsanto, and everyone’s sovereign rights to life are at stake.


Related: Torturing the Milk Man: Rawesome Foods owner spills all (March 10 interview)

Also see this Sept. 2011 interview on the Alex Jones Show, a month after the second Rawesome raid, Stewart talks about sovereignty and government overreach:

1 comment for “Monsanto’s attack on James Stewart and You

Leave a Reply