A Golden-Oldie from R-Calf.....

[S.S.A.P.]

SH, "Since you support R-CULT and R-CULT considers Canadian beef unsafe due to the amount of BSE in their native herd, would our beef be unsafe if we had that many cases of BSE in our herd? If not, why not?"

Yes it would. For the same occurance/head, we only need 27 more positives.

Sh, "Perhaps you would like to explain McDonnell's position that we have the safest beef in the world due to our firewalls yet Canadian beef is high risk with the same firewalls. Want to try defending that one slippery?"

Looks to me like one country's firewalls are working better than the other.

Looks to me that one country is looking harder then the other. :cowboy:

I won't argue with you on that one.

So what you are saying Sandhusker, is that as long as the US's BSE cases are less than 1/7th of Canada's your beef is safe and ours is not.

On a scale of 1 to (your) 27 when does your safe beef disappear Sandhusker?

 

[mrj]

Hagel was on National TV. Was that unusual?

Unfortunately, no, it isn't unusual. Hagel is, at the least, putting out feelers for a presidential candidacy. I think it is reprehensible that he would use the war for political gain, as he appears to me to be doing. He has been making pretty liberal statements for quite a while now, apparently believing that is safer than taking a conservative tone.

BTW, isn't it a fact that Chandler was accurate in indicating, never mind the language he used, that Mexico does have MANY disease and parasite challenges to their cattle herd?

It is doubtful the Mexican official would have been happy to have that fact stated loud and clear, no matter the terms used.

Does anyone know how many times Australia DID meet their quota during the time frame Chandler referenced? Most people with any knowledge of the cattle/beef industry understood his meaning reasonably well, IMO.

MRJ

So MRJ I take it you mean with NCBA members we assume what they meant and justify it to the way we want it to ( or it sounds best that day)- but with R-CALF members you scrutinize and pick it down to the final crossed t and dotted i :roll: ....Sounds like you and SH-- think a lot alike........ :lol:

OT, in my previous reply to your assertion that Chandler Keys erred in those two statements, I should have pointed out the deviousness of you taking statements out of context.

You, in effect, isolated those comments and put them under your "gotcha" microscope and promoted the comments as showing he lied. Ridiculous!

Hearing the entire scope of the remarks Chandler made, no one in the audience had to "assume what he meant". Clarity of what he says is never a problem when Chandler Keys is speaking!!!!

Contrast any possible harm to the cattle industry by "mis-understanding" what Chandler was saying, as you do.........with that which could very well come from R-CALF top leaders and even an ad telling consumers that US beef safety is threatened because they cannot tell which is Canadian and which is US beef in stores.....and saying that Canadian beef may carry BSE.

MRJ

MRJ

 

[Anonymous]

Sandman,

Why don't you just come clean and admit that BSE is nothing more than a convenient excuse to stop Canadian imports when the firewalls in each country are exactly the same with Canada actually taking the additional steps that R-CULT is promoting now.

Quit being such a phony and just say you don't want Canadian imports or you'll end up like Leo by talking out of both sides of your mouth.

Canada has looked harder for BSE than we have which plays conveniently into your hands doesn't it?

R-CULT's motives epitomize dirty politics.


~SH~

 

[Anonymous]

Unfortunately, no, it isn't unusual. Hagel is, at the least, putting out feelers for a presidential candidacy. I think it is reprehensible that he would use the war for political gain, as he appears to me to be doing. He has been making pretty liberal statements for quite a while now, apparently believing that is safer than taking a conservative tone.

BTW, isn't it a fact that Chandler was accurate in indicating, never mind the language he used, that Mexico does have MANY disease and parasite challenges to their cattle herd?

It is doubtful the Mexican official would have been happy to have that fact stated loud and clear, no matter the terms used.

Does anyone know how many times Australia DID meet their quota during the time frame Chandler referenced? Most people with any knowledge of the cattle/beef industry understood his meaning reasonably well, IMO.

MRJ

So MRJ I take it you mean with NCBA members we assume what they meant and justify it to the way we want it to ( or it sounds best that day)- but with R-CALF members you scrutinize and pick it down to the final crossed t and dotted i :roll: ....Sounds like you and SH-- think a lot alike........ :lol:

OT, in my previous reply to your assertion that Chandler Keys erred in those two statements, I should have pointed out the deviousness of you taking statements out of context.

You, in effect, isolated those comments and put them under your "gotcha" microscope and promoted the comments as showing he lied. Ridiculous!

Hearing the entire scope of the remarks Chandler made, no one in the audience had to "assume what he meant". Clarity of what he says is never a problem when Chandler Keys is speaking!!!!

Contrast any possible harm to the cattle industry by "mis-understanding" what Chandler was saying, as you do.........with that which could very well come from R-CALF top leaders and even an ad telling consumers that US beef safety is threatened because they cannot tell which is Canadian and which is US beef in stores.....and saying that Canadian beef may carry BSE.

MRJ

MRJ

MRJ- Where would that put Dr. Webers testimony to Congress that "there is no BSE in the US", months before BSE was found--Just a little "misunderstanding" or was it a little "misassumption" Or just plain talking out his a** without knowing what he was talking about:???: :lol: :lol: ...

You know if he worked for R-CALF, you and your "initial son" would be on here screaming LIES and DECEPTION....

 

[Sandhusker]

Sandman,

Why don't you just come clean and admit that BSE is nothing more than a convenient excuse to stop Canadian imports when the firewalls in each country are exactly the same with Canada actually taking the additional steps that R-CULT is promoting now.

Quit being such a phony and just say you don't want Canadian imports or you'll end up like Leo by talking out of both sides of your mouth.

Canada has looked harder for BSE than we have which plays conveniently into your hands doesn't it?

R-CULT's motives epitomize dirty politics.


~SH~

Why don't you come clean and admit our BSE HEALTH policies were completly altered for ECONOMICS (MONEY). What exactly was different in our knowledge, procedures, etc... between country #22 & #23?

England has looked harder and has much more stringent BSE policies than Canada does - why aren't we taking their product?

 

[TimH]

Sandhusker - "England has looked harder and has much more stringent BSE policies than Canada does - why aren't we taking their product?"

Since your own arguement for the safety of US beef is based on the number of BSE cases(1 in the US vs 4 in Canada) , perhaps the number of BSE positive cases in the British herd has something to do with it. 180,000 or thereabouts. Just a thought. :wink:

 

[Sandhusker]

Sandhusker - "England has looked harder and has much more stringent BSE policies than Canada does - why aren't we taking their product?"

Since your own arguement for the safety of US beef is based on the number of BSE cases(1 in the US vs 4 in Canada) , perhaps the number of BSE positive cases in the British herd has something to do with it. 180,000 or thereabouts. Just a thought. :wink:

True, but the "sound science" that we are supposed to believe in says that SRM removal removes all danger of BSE. Therefore, that should make beef safe even if it comes from a herd with a 100% infection rate. :wink:

 

[Big Muddy rancher]

Sandhusker - "England has looked harder and has much more stringent BSE policies than Canada does - why aren't we taking their product?"

Since your own arguement for the safety of US beef is based on the number of BSE cases(1 in the US vs 4 in Canada) , perhaps the number of BSE positive cases in the British herd has something to do with it. 180,000 or thereabouts. Just a thought. :wink:

True, but the "sound science" that we are supposed to believe in says that SRM removal removes all danger of BSE. Therefore, that should make beef safe even if it comes from a herd with a 100% infection rate. :wink:

Yes and UK is now shipping to the EU again. Other then MBM how much beef did the US take from the British before BSE.

 

[TimH]

Sandhusker - "England has looked harder and has much more stringent BSE policies than Canada does - why aren't we taking their product?"

Since your own arguement for the safety of US beef is based on the number of BSE cases(1 in the US vs 4 in Canada) , perhaps the number of BSE positive cases in the British herd has something to do with it. 180,000 or thereabouts. Just a thought. :wink:

True, but the "sound science" that we are supposed to believe in says that SRM removal removes all danger of BSE. Therefore, that should make beef safe even if it comes from a herd with a 100% infection rate. :wink:

Am I to assume, judging by your :wink: , that you do not believe that SRM removal makes beef safe??

 

[Sandhusker]

Sandhusker - "England has looked harder and has much more stringent BSE policies than Canada does - why aren't we taking their product?"

Since your own arguement for the safety of US beef is based on the number of BSE cases(1 in the US vs 4 in Canada) , perhaps the number of BSE positive cases in the British herd has something to do with it. 180,000 or thereabouts. Just a thought. :wink:

True, but the "sound science" that we are supposed to believe in says that SRM removal removes all danger of BSE. Therefore, that should make beef safe even if it comes from a herd with a 100% infection rate. :wink:

Yes and UK is now shipping to the EU again. Other then MBM how much beef did the US take from the British before BSE.

BMR, you're just proving my point about the real reasons for the border being opened.

Prior to BSE, we hardly did any importing of British beef or cattle. Therefore, closing the border to them had little effect on anybody. As a matter of fact, that was the case with the first 22 countries that discovered BSE. It was pretty easy for the USDA to stick out their chests and proclaim "We closed the border to protect our herd and consumers". When you got BSE, all of a sudden that policy wasn't so easy. It was costing the big packers money. They pushed and the USDA decided the packer's checkbooks trumped US safety. If you don't believe that, tell me what, other than the packer's interests, was different with Canada than the other 22 countries?

The USDA then claims, "We need to use sound science" and started talking about SRM removal and age limits as the key to safety. Another smoke screen easily seen thru - if SRM removal and younger cattle are truly the answer to safety, why is our border open to you yet still closed to England and other countries when their SRM removal and age requirements are much more stringent than yours?

I'd sure like some answers to my questions. :?

 

[rkaiser]

Have to jump in here. I hope you fellow Canadians don't mind. I think that some of what Sandhusker is saying is very true, and hard to argue with unless of course your name is Scott Huber.

The US border did not open to boxed beef for anything but economic reasons.

I BELEIVE that the border should have opened completely at that time and in fact should not have closed at all. BSE has always been a very good excuse for anyone with any kind of economic agenda to push the button. Rcalf is no different. However judging part of any groups actions without seeing the rest of the picture is narrow.

As far as I am concerned. Rcalf makes a point. Why was the border opened to boxed beef, and not live cattle? And please no sceintific answers here because the sceince of this issue is pathetic and makes us all look like fools talking about it.

 

[Anonymous]

Sandman: "Why don't you come clean and admit our BSE HEALTH policies were completly altered for ECONOMICS (MONEY)."

Let's see the proof to back that allegation you phony. Another baseless allgegation unsupported by fact.

You know damn well that you concern with BSE is only a concern for Canadian imports. You aren't fooling anyone but yourself with this "I CARE MORE ABOUT FOOD SAFETY THAN USDA" bullsh*t.

USDA is accountable to the consumers and the consumers outvote the packers by 99%. Who do you think your're kidding trying to suggest that USDA opened the borders due to political influence by the packing industry? What a crock! The political pressure on USDA is coming from the consumer, not the producer and not the packer. To suggest otherwise borders on insanity. Find some common sense.

USDA's policies on BSE have to reflect the precautionary measure that have been taken and to maintain any integrity, something that you couldn't relate to, we cannot expect to impose restrictions on any country that we would not want restricted on us. That's what you call "FAIR TRADE". A deceptive individual like you would not understand that concept.

Sandman: "England has looked harder and has much more stringent BSE policies than Canada does - why aren't we taking their product?"

BECAUSE THEY BANNED OUR CATTLE DUE TO IMPLANTS!

Where have you been?

RK: "Why was the border opened to boxed beef, and not live cattle?"

YOU REALLY DON' T KNOW????????????????

BECAUSE R-CULT FILED AN INJUNCTION TO STOP THE IMPORTATION OF LIVE CATTLE!

Where have you been?


This should be called idiotscontinuallycorrected.net


~SH~

 

[rkaiser]

Okay your highness, I don't know. When was the border opened to boxed beef? I beleive that it was sometime in Sept. 2003. When was the Rcalf injunction filed? That I truely cannot remember. Are you saying the it stopped the importation of live cattle in Sept. of 2003?

 

[rkaiser]

Okay, I waited long enough.

Time to correct the idiot.

SH

USDA is accountable to the consumers and the consumers outvote the packers by 99%. Who do you think your're kidding trying to suggest that USDA opened the borders due to political influence by the packing industry? What a crock! The political pressure on USDA is coming from the consumer, not the producer and not the packer. To suggest otherwise borders on insanity. Find some common sense.

I see SH. You are suggesting that there was some kind of consensus among the American people as to whether the border should open or not. Or maybe they were polled to see if they wanted boxed beef to come into America but not live fat cattle in a locked trailer from the same Canadian feedlot.

Talk about using common sense. :roll: :roll:

USDA made their move with economics in mind and only economics.

Just like Rcalf made their move "thinking" they would gain economically.

 

[Big Muddy rancher]

Well opinions are cheap and here is my two cents worth. The USDA wanted to change the rules when Canada discovered BSE to protect them selves. Imports from Britian woo hoo it didn't mean much to the US but BSE in the US means alot to US producers. I can't figure out why these producers will support R-CALF when they don't want the rule changed as they would be the ones to benefit.

 

[rkaiser]

What do ya think of that one SH?

 

[Anonymous]

Randy Kaiser: "USDA made their move with economics in mind and only economics."

Let me show you how completely hopeless you are.

R-CALF filed an injunction against USDA to stop the border from opening.

Do you understand what that means Randy?

Let me explain it to you. R-CALF wanted the border to stay closed while USDA wanted it open when you claim USDA and the packers wanted it to stay closed.

WHY THE HELL WOULD R-CALF FILE AN INJUNCTION AGAINST USDA TO KEEP THE BORDER CLOSED IF, AS YOU SUGGEST, USDA WANTED THE BORDER TO STAY CLOSED FOR PACKER INTERESTS??????

DOES THAT MAKE ANY SENSE TO YOU????????????

You are so brainwashed with your packer blamer that the most obvious aspects of this issue blaze over your head like an F-15.

Are you trying to get Hayseed's title of "village idiot" away from him?


~SH~

 

[mrj]

So MRJ I take it you mean with NCBA members we assume what they meant and justify it to the way we want it to ( or it sounds best that day)- but with R-CALF members you scrutinize and pick it down to the final crossed t and dotted i :roll: ....Sounds like you and SH-- think a lot alike........ :lol:

OT, in my previous reply to your assertion that Chandler Keys erred in those two statements, I should have pointed out the deviousness of you taking statements out of context.

You, in effect, isolated those comments and put them under your "gotcha" microscope and promoted the comments as showing he lied. Ridiculous!

Hearing the entire scope of the remarks Chandler made, no one in the audience had to "assume what he meant". Clarity of what he says is never a problem when Chandler Keys is speaking!!!!

Contrast any possible harm to the cattle industry by "mis-understanding" what Chandler was saying, as you do.........with that which could very well come from R-CALF top leaders and even an ad telling consumers that US beef safety is threatened because they cannot tell which is Canadian and which is US beef in stores.....and saying that Canadian beef may carry BSE.

MRJ

MRJ

MRJ- Where would that put Dr. Webers testimony to Congress that "there is no BSE in the US", months before BSE was found--Just a little "misunderstanding" or was it a little "misassumption" Or just plain talking out his a** without knowing what he was talking about:???: :lol: :lol: ...

You know if he worked for R-CALF, you and your "initial son" would be on here screaming LIES and DECEPTION....

I don't know the details of what you claim is a statement by Dr. Weber. Your penchant for quoting a line without the "before and after" which might change the meaning of what you quoted is a cause for concern, IMO.

I do wonder, though, since no one else knew at the time that there would be a BSE case in the future, just why you think Dr. Weber is at fault for saying there was none?

I am very certain whatever Dr. Weber said or was refering to , he was basing his comments on the best science available on the subject as that time. How can anyone expect of ask better than that of him? Maybe you should try that sometime!

MRJ

 

[rkaiser]

You got that village idiot title all sown up SH.

Blab away about who wanted the border opened and who wanted it shut all you want. Who shut it. And who opened it to boxed beef in Sept. 2003. When was Rcalf's injunction filed?

You are so blinded by your bias that you simply cannot see any other way.

USDA opened the border to boxed beef despite any effort from Rcalf. Why did that happen? And please don't go into your American consumer BS again SH.

If the USDA wanted the border to open so bad to live Canadian cattle, why did it stay closed. It opened pretty quick when they wanted the boxed beef thing to happen.

Rcalf was a pawn, and an easy one at that. The protectionist views of some of their leadership set them up perfectly.

 

[Anonymous]

RANDY,

SAY IT WITH ME,

R-CULT FILED AN INJUNCTION TO STOP THE IMPORTATION OF LIVE CATTLE.

R-CULT FILED AN INJUNCTION TO STOP THE IMPORTATION OF LIVE CATTLE.

R-CULT FILED AN INJUNCTION TO STOP THE IMPORTATION OF LIVE CATTLE.

R-CULT FILED AN INJUNCTION TO STOP THE IMPORTATION OF LIVE CATTLE.

R-CULT FILED AN INJUNCTION TO STOP THE IMPORTATION OF LIVE CATTLE.

R-CULT FILED AN INJUNCTION TO STOP THE IMPORTATION OF LIVE CATTLE.


IN CONTRAST.........

NOBODY FILED AN INJUCTION TO STOP THE IMPORTATION OF BOXED BEEF

NOBODY FILED AN INJUCTION TO STOP THE IMPORTATION OF BOXED BEEF

NOBODY FILED AN INJUCTION TO STOP THE IMPORTATION OF BOXED BEEF

NOBODY FILED AN INJUCTION TO STOP THE IMPORTATION OF BOXED BEEF

NOBODY FILED AN INJUCTION TO STOP THE IMPORTATION OF BOXED BEEF

NOBODY FILED AN INJUCTION TO STOP THE IMPORTATION OF BOXED BEEF

NOBODY FILED AN INJUCTION TO STOP THE IMPORTATION OF BOXED BEEF


LET ME KNOW IF IT SINKS INTO THAT THICK HEAD OF YOURS!

Randy Kaiser: "You are so blinded by your bias that you simply cannot see any other way."

Hahaha!

Listen to you! There is no greater bias then your need to blame. You have never contradicted a single thing I have ever stated with facts to the contrary. NOT ONCE! Another cheap talker!


~SH~