NCBA

[Mike]

Another Quote from NCBA

U.S. cattlemen lost $15/cwt ($175/head) on fed cattle prices when our export markets closed as a result of the U.S. December 23, 2003, BSE discovery. U.S. cattlemen deserve to get that $15/cwt back. We have done everything right in the United States to produce safe and wholesome beef for world consumption.

[Sandhusker]

[Kato]

Just one item missing from their argument. One very large item.

That is the literally millions of Canadian cattle in your national herd. The same Canadian cattle that have been labelled as tainted and diseased by American self-interest groups.

Have they all just vanished? NO
Have they all been identified? NO
Can they be identified? NO
Are they being scrutinized at slaughter or natural death to the extent that cattle in Canada are? NO
Does the OIE know this? YES

[Sandhusker]

While SH is trying to defend the NCBA, maybe he or any other NCBA member would like to comment on what Creekstone has to say,

"Fielding says he went back to NCBA's charter and found that among their guiding principles are free enterprise, limited government and consumer focus. "

How does supporting USDA's denial of Creekstone's proposal match these guiding principles?

[Oldtimer]

[Kato]

How hard have you looked? The rest of the world is thinking "Not too hard".

That is a problem, not just due to the number of Canadian cattle in your herd, but due to the same history of importing British cattle, and feeding practices that we both used before the feed bans came in place. A lot of people are of the opinion that it's just a matter of time..

[whiteface]

While I agree with you totally, Hat, I just have to ask...
Are you 'bruskers' little brother by any chance. Same attitude but without the evolved brashness of the boy we used to love. Just curious, nobody's picking a fight...
well, at least I'm not, have a good day all!

[~SH~]

SH (previous): "Before I would judge that statement, I would ask for specifics. What did they mean by "all that we've done"???"

Sandhusker (in response): " I actually laughed out loud when I read that!"

Well good for you. I am sure it is beyond your grasp to comprehend qualifying a statement from a credible source such as Gary Weber. For all I know that statement may have been taken out of context by the author.

As I said before, that statement, if actually stated, appears quite bold when considering all that Canada has done to address BSE with their traceback system and testing of 4-D cattle.

I would allow Gary Weber to at least qualify his statement. He has far more integrity than to lie about the safety of Canadian beef the way R-CULT does.


Sandhusker: "Do you "ask for specifics" before you judge R-CALF's statements?"

Depends on the statement. Like you say, they are usually presenting the half of the story that supports their bias. Either that or they are flat lying or contradicting what they said yesterday.


Sandhusker: " usually try to refrain from calling names, but what a flaming hypocrite!"

I know you need something like an NCBA quote now and then to take the focus off R-CULT's lies about the safety of Canadian beef. I understand. If I was an R-CULT turbin head that couldn't think for myself and had no integrity, I'd probably do the same thing.


OT: "There are still some Canadian cattle in the US- but many of the imports were dairy or bulls that have probably already gone thru the system-already used up--- That said it is possible both countries have BSE- but to what extent?"

If it wasn't an issue, R-CULT would have never demanded that USDA find the Canadian cattle in our system and test them. Too late to change the significance now OT!


OT: "The US has somewhere around 90-95% of the cattle in North America- but we have found no cattle of US origin... Canada has 5% of the cattle in North America and have been traced to 4---To me, that makes the risk factor of Canadian cattle much higher-- I think the statisticians say it is 1000% more likely that Canada still has BSE cows than the US...."

Canada has also looked harder than we have by heavily testing the highest risk categories. This is just how you justify knifing the Canadian producers in the back.


OT: "How does supporting USDA's denial of Creekstone's proposal match these guiding principles?"

It stops at the point of deceiving consumers into believing 100% testing offers safer beef.

It stops at setting a presidence that 100% testing is justified.


Quote: "The directive tells NCBA’s lobbying staff to push the U.S. government to seek resumption of beef export trade with Japan and South Korea, and restoration of pre-BSE beef export rules in Mexico before NCBA supports normalization of Canadian trade."

I disagree with that NCBA directive. In order to normalize trade, we have to take the first step. We cannot expect Japan to take our beef if we are unwilling to take Canadian cattle but are willing to take their beef.


Unlike these R-CULTers, I can think independent of my chosen organization. I also disagree with their position on limiting the USDA grade stamp to domestic production only without a valid traceback system to confirm it.



~SH~

[Sandhusker]

OT: "How does supporting USDA's denial of Creekstone's proposal match these guiding principles?"

SH, "It stops at the point of deceiving consumers into believing 100% testing offers safer beef. It stops at setting a presidence that 100% testing is justified. "

When did NCBA add a "deception and justification" clause?

Is the deception you're talking about that same deception that boiled down to "Somebody told them something sometime"?

Think about it, SH. You KNOW NCBA has egg on their faces on this one. Everybody else can figure it out, too.

[~SH~]

Sandhusker: "When did NCBA add a "deception and justification" clause?"

There's your deceptive nature again Sandhusker.

Who would need a "decepton clause" to not support something that is as deceptive as 100% testing that reveals nothing???


Sandhusker: "Is the deception you're talking about that same deception that boiled down to "Somebody told them something sometime"?"

You'd be the one that would know about that. You support any statement that supports your R-CULT bias.


Sandhusker: "Think about it, SH. You KNOW NCBA has egg on their faces on this one. Everybody else can figure it out, too."

NCBA does not have egg on their face for taking a stand against deceptive marketing. That's what 100% testing is.

You and I will never agree on this so why don't you give it a rest. No sense in hammering the same issue over and over and over and over.

I will never support Creekstone wanting to create the perception that 100% testing offers food safety when it doesn't. If that was not the intent, then there would be no reason for it.

"WE ARE PROVIDING 100% TESTING KNOWING THAT IT DOES NOT GUARANTEE SAFE FOOD"

What a farse!


~SH~

[~SH~]

Hat: "SH, I think your DREAMY!"

Of course you do because that's easier than bringing the facts to support your position.

You R-CULTers are all the same. Just keep nodding your heads as your leaders tell you what you want to hear. Facts be damned!



~SH~