• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Blast from the Past

Mike

Well-known member
April, 2004

The president of the American Meat Institute, which represents slaughterhouses, and the director of regulatory affairs at the National Cattlemen's Beef Association, which represents ranchers, praised the USDA decision not to let Creekstone test all beef for BSE.

Gary Weber of the cattlemen's association called 100% testing misleading to consumers because it would create a false impression that untested beef was not safe. He compared it to demanding that all cars be crash tested to prove they are safe.

Asked if American beef producers were content to give up the $1.5 billion Japanese market, Mr. Weber said: "We're not going to give in to their demands. If that means in the short-to-medium term that we don't have that market, that's the price we'll pay. But in the long run, it means there's testing that's science based and that creates a level playing field."

Asked if beef producers did not want to be pressured to imitate Creekstone and pay for more tests, Mr. Weber said it was "absolutely not about the money."
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Maybe thats a price he is willing to pay, but I've got a list of customers going thru renewal now that sure could of benefitted from selling beef to Asia! That $175 would of made all the difference in the world. I probably don't have to tell you folks this, but this last year was not a good one for producers.

"Mr. Weber said it was "absolutely not about the money.""

Just what the heck does Mr. Weber think folks are in the business for? So they can justify wearing cowboy hats?

Mike, is the the same NCBA guy who was "confused" on which tests worked?
 

Mike

Well-known member
Mike, is the the same NCBA guy who was "confused" on which tests worked?

Yep. He is the idiot that said "Prionics" was only out to sell test kits and that the "Gold Standard" IHC test was all the USDA needed for confirmatory tests.

Phyllis, the UK OIE Lab, and the Japs OIE Lab proved him wrong.

"Idiot" may be too strong of a word here. "Ignorant" might be more suitable.
 

mrj

Well-known member
And y'all are the geniuses who believe simply testing every food bovine animal is the way to go?????

Which test is infallible enough that each and any of you is willing to guarantee it?

What if someone decides to re-test a piece of beef they purchased with their own favorite BSE test......and it shows a positive after the "official" test showed it to be negative for BSE?

BTW, which R-CALF leader was it that stated we do not need to export beef????

MRJ
 

mrj

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
MRJ, "BTW, which R-CALF leader was it that stated we do not need to export beef???? "

Running with clowns again, MRJ?

Are you saying no one in R-CALF said that we do not need to export beef?

MRJ
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
MRJ said:
Sandhusker said:
MRJ, "BTW, which R-CALF leader was it that stated we do not need to export beef???? "

Running with clowns again, MRJ?

Are you saying no one in R-CALF said that we do not need to export beef?

MRJ

I think it is funny that when NCBA comments are brought here, you always want to know what context the message was delivered in, what was said before and after the comment, etc... but you don't seem to maintain that same standard for R-CALF. I suggest you practice what you preach and find out what was said before that comment.

What do you think of Mr. Weber's comments?
 

Econ101

Well-known member
MRJ said:
And y'all are the geniuses who believe simply testing every food bovine animal is the way to go?????

Which test is infallible enough that each and any of you is willing to guarantee it?

What if someone decides to re-test a piece of beef they purchased with their own favorite BSE test......and it shows a positive after the "official" test showed it to be negative for BSE?

BTW, which R-CALF leader was it that stated we do not need to export beef????

MRJ

MRJ, I know you like me now, saying y'all and all. I'm flustered.

If people want to test, they should be able to. It is the USDA and lack of good NCBA efforts that are not allowing freedom to test. You would think you were the beef Nazis or something. :oops: :oops:
 

mrj

Well-known member
Econ101 said:
MRJ said:
And y'all are the geniuses who believe simply testing every food bovine animal is the way to go?????

Which test is infallible enough that each and any of you is willing to guarantee it?

What if someone decides to re-test a piece of beef they purchased with their own favorite BSE test......and it shows a positive after the "official" test showed it to be negative for BSE?

BTW, which R-CALF leader was it that stated we do not need to export beef????

MRJ

MRJ, I know you like me now, saying y'all and all. I'm flustered.

If people want to test, they should be able to. It is the USDA and lack of good NCBA efforts that are not allowing freedom to test. You would think you were the beef Nazis or something. :oops: :oops:

You fail to understand that USDA is charged with administering that test, and would not be able to control the testing by an outside entity; that the situation with BSE is fraught with unknowns; that according to currently internationally accepted science, there is no danger from eating beef when the current protocols are followed; and that it does not fit those protocols for individual businesses to test for BSE.

It has nothing to do with individual rights and everything to do with being able to maintain a safe beef product in accordance with current internationally accepted science.

Sadly, you will be disappointed once again, but there simply is NO bogeman doing his little conspiracy dance here.

MRJ
 

Mike

Well-known member
MRJ wrote:You fail to understand that USDA is charged with administering that test,

The USDA failed in administering the TEXAS cow test. MISERABLY. That fiasco is probably why it took so long to get the Japs to accept a pound of beef.
and would not be able to control the testing by an outside entity;

You didn't know that Creekstone wanted the USDA to set up Kansas State University as a satellite BSE testing lab like they have several other University labs to provide oversight and direction for Creekstone testing?

Creekstone wanted the USDA to be in control. They asked for it. They were going to furnish the lab, trained technicians, and the test kits.
Just like hospitals do for testing human diseases.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
MRJ, "You fail to understand that USDA is charged with administering that test, and would not be able to control the testing by an outside entity"

How does the USDA handle private companies that test for EColi? Are you telling us they have no control over those?

Besides that, the tests would be for a foreign country. If they are satisfied with procedures, what's the problem with the USDA?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandcheska: "Maybe thats a price he is willing to pay, but I've got a list of customers going thru renewal now that sure could of benefitted from selling beef to Asia! That $175 would of made all the difference in the world. I probably don't have to tell you folks this, but this last year was not a good one for producers."

To suggest, WITHOUT A STITCH OF PROOF, that we would have normalized trade with Japan if we had only adopted deceptive 100% bse testing is nothing more than a bold faced lie.

There is absolutely nothing to support the claim that we would have normalized trade with Japan had we just adopted 100% bse testing. It's just more R-CULT bullsh*t!

Little Sandcheska doesn't even realize that a big reason we are not shipping more high dollar beef to Japan currently is due to the lack of high choice and prime cattle that are currently available.

Dr. Gary Weber was right on the money with his statement. It's stupid to cave in to the "SUPPOSED" PERCEPTIONS of a few and give credence to the lie that 100% testing is justified.

Science does not support 100% testing and that is why Japan is not talking about 100% testing, that is why Canada is not talking about 100% testing, and that is why the US is not talking about 100% testing. The only people advocating 100% bse testing are those who have a vested financial interest in testing or USDA blamers that simply don't know any better.


~SH~
 

Econ101

Well-known member
~SH~ said:
Sandcheska: "Maybe thats a price he is willing to pay, but I've got a list of customers going thru renewal now that sure could of benefitted from selling beef to Asia! That $175 would of made all the difference in the world. I probably don't have to tell you folks this, but this last year was not a good one for producers."

To suggest, WITHOUT A STITCH OF PROOF, that we would have normalized trade with Japan if we had only adopted deceptive 100% bse testing is nothing more than a bold faced lie.

There is absolutely nothing to support the claim that we would have normalized trade with Japan had we just adopted 100% bse testing. It's just more R-CULT bullsh*t!

Little Sandcheska doesn't even realize that a big reason we are not shipping more high dollar beef to Japan currently is due to the lack of high choice and prime cattle that are currently available.

Dr. Gary Weber was right on the money with his statement. It's stupid to cave in to the "SUPPOSED" PERCEPTIONS of a few and give credence to the lie that 100% testing is justified.

Science does not support 100% testing and that is why Japan is not talking about 100% testing, that is why Canada is not talking about 100% testing, and that is why the US is not talking about 100% testing. The only people advocating 100% bse testing are those who have a vested financial interest in testing or USDA blamers that simply don't know any better.


~SH~

Why do you keep trying to talk cattle producers out of income they could receive through marketing their product as one safer the USDA has deemed is appropriate?

Is it because you are not in the cattle business?

Packer lackey.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Lying King: "Why do you keep trying to talk cattle producers out of income they could receive through marketing their product as one safer the USDA has deemed is appropriate?

Is it because you are not in the cattle business?"


Another bold faced lie!

Japan is not requesting 100% bse testing. To suggest they and to suggest that producers lost all kinds of money because USDA did not push for 100% bse testing is a lie. Par for your lying course you pathetic SOB.


~SH~
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
~SH~ said:
Sandcheska: "Maybe thats a price he is willing to pay, but I've got a list of customers going thru renewal now that sure could of benefitted from selling beef to Asia! That $175 would of made all the difference in the world. I probably don't have to tell you folks this, but this last year was not a good one for producers."

To suggest, WITHOUT A STITCH OF PROOF, that we would have normalized trade with Japan if we had only adopted deceptive 100% bse testing is nothing more than a bold faced lie.

There is absolutely nothing to support the claim that we would have normalized trade with Japan had we just adopted 100% bse testing. It's just more R-CULT bullsh*t!

Little Sandcheska doesn't even realize that a big reason we are not shipping more high dollar beef to Japan currently is due to the lack of high choice and prime cattle that are currently available.

Dr. Gary Weber was right on the money with his statement. It's stupid to cave in to the "SUPPOSED" PERCEPTIONS of a few and give credence to the lie that 100% testing is justified.

Science does not support 100% testing and that is why Japan is not talking about 100% testing, that is why Canada is not talking about 100% testing, and that is why the US is not talking about 100% testing. The only people advocating 100% bse testing are those who have a vested financial interest in testing or USDA blamers that simply don't know any better.


~SH~

Japan asked for testing. No doubt about it. Judging by the time it took to get the half-assed agreement we have with them now, they asked it for quite some time. If you think that meeting a customer's demand wouldn't help normalize trade, you're an idiot.

You don't realize that he reason we're not shipping more to Japan is because the USDA sign an agreement that is extremely difficult for us to meet.

Gary Weber made a foolish statement. The course of action he's supporting is getting us nowhere. Figure it out. How much can we get to Japan? How much is Korea taking?

Science doesn't support hormone free beef, either, but there doesn't seem to be anything holding up that business. USDA hypocracy for the big boys at it's finest.

Some people want BSE tested beef. That is a market that we are unable to tap - and why? How much untested beef are those folks going to eat? Why do you support the liberal idea that the government gets to central plan what we can export? What happened to free enterprise?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandcheska: "Japan asked for testing. No doubt about it."

Bullsh*t! PROVE IT!

Testing was not even mentioned during negotiations. It's a damn lie!


Sandcheska: "Judging by the time it took to get the half-assed agreement we have with them now, they asked it for quite some time. If you think that meeting a customer's demand wouldn't help normalize trade, you're an idiot."

If Japan wanted 100% bse testing, they would be asking for it now. This "CLAIM" of Japan wanting testing is nothing more than R-CULT USDA blaming bullsh*t.


Sandcheska: "You don't realize that he reason we're not shipping more to Japan is because the USDA sign an agreement that is extremely difficult for us to meet."

No, the reason we are not shipping more beef to Japan is because we had bse in our herd and there is a lower percentage of age verified high choice and prime beef available to them.


Sandcheska: "Gary Weber made a foolish statement. The course of action he's supporting is getting us nowhere. Figure it out. How much can we get to Japan? How much is Korea taking?"

The course of action you recommended was consumer deception. A pathetic example of the type of person you are. The reason Japan and Korea are not taking more beef has nothing to do with testing and everything to do with non tarriff trade barriers and bse.


Sandcheska: "Science doesn't support hormone free beef, either, but there doesn't seem to be anything holding up that business. USDA hypocracy for the big boys at it's finest."

Hormone free is not comparable to fraudulent bse testing. Another "ILLUSION".


Sandcheska: "Some people want BSE tested beef. That is a market that we are unable to tap - and why? How much untested beef are those folks going to eat? Why do you support the liberal idea that the government gets to central plan what we can export? What happened to free enterprise?"

Some people? A minute ago it was a whole country and now it's "SOME PEOPLE". Typical backpeddling from a factually defunct position.

Nobody is asking for 100% bse testing other than USDA blamers and test sellers.

Deceiving consumers with bse tested beef from cattle under 24 months of age with a test that will not reveal bse prions in cattle under 24 months of age is not free enterprise. It's consumer fraud.

You got nothing!


~SH~
 

Econ101

Well-known member
~SH~ said:
Lying King: "Why do you keep trying to talk cattle producers out of income they could receive through marketing their product as one safer the USDA has deemed is appropriate?

Is it because you are not in the cattle business?"


Another bold faced lie!

Japan is not requesting 100% bse testing. To suggest they and to suggest that producers lost all kinds of money because USDA did not push for 100% bse testing is a lie. Par for your lying course you pathetic SOB.


~SH~

SH, it is results that count when in the sales business--something the NCBA and the USDA have not been able to deliver, and in fact, have been in the way of.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Lying King: "SH, it is results that count when in the sales business--something the NCBA and the USDA have not been able to deliver, and in fact, have been in the way of."

Nothing justifies consumer deception you pathetic SOB!


~SH~
 

Econ101

Well-known member
~SH~ said:
Lying King: "SH, it is results that count when in the sales business--something the NCBA and the USDA have not been able to deliver, and in fact, have been in the way of."

Nothing justifies consumer deception you pathetic SOB!


~SH~

SH, you are very lucky to be hiding behind that computer screen. People in these parts don't take kindly to your kind of language.

Did you have a momma or did she just not teach you right?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Conman: "SH, you are very lucky to be hiding behind that computer screen."

Anytime you want to have this discussion in person, let me know the time and place but you better come alone. Anyone that lies and deceives as much as you do is a pathetic SOB and I'll be glad to tell you that to your face but then you'd have to reveal your identity wouldn't you?


Conman: "People in these parts don't take kindly to your kind of language."

People in these parts don't take kindly to lies and deception.


~SH~
 
Top