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

Deliberate Sabotage?

Tam

Well-known member
I would still like to know why if beef is sold with a USDA INSPECTED and it is implied to mean US BEEF it is a fraud. BUT when Creekstone's BSE Tested beef is sold with a label that implies BSE Free it's not fraud is't just the consumer not knowing the truth? :roll:
 

Mike

Well-known member
You're not getting this one by me. Creekstone wasn't planning on selling "BSE Free Beef". They were going to sell "BSE TESTED Beef".

Correct. It was the NCBA and AMI that wanted to label US beef going to Japan as "BSE FREE"............ WITHOUT a test!!!!!!!!!!
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Tam said:
I would still like to know why if beef is sold with a USDA INSPECTED and it is implied to mean US BEEF it is a fraud. BUT when Creekstone's BSE Tested beef is sold with a label that implies BSE Free it's not fraud is't just the consumer not knowing the truth? :roll:

Creekstone is implying nothing. They said "BSE testing does not mean BSE free". Other than SH, who can't understand that statement? How can there be any implications after a statement that clear?
 

Tam

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
Tam said:
I would still like to know why if beef is sold with a USDA INSPECTED and it is implied to mean US BEEF it is a fraud. BUT when Creekstone's BSE Tested beef is sold with a label that implies BSE Free it's not fraud is't just the consumer not knowing the truth? :roll:

Creekstone is implying nothing. They said "BSE testing does not mean BSE free". Other than SH, who can't understand that statement? How can there be any implications after a statement that clear?

The USDA is implying Nothing also :roll: They inspected all the meat to the same standards imported or not and found all the meat to be of the same standard. Where did the USDA say the meat was US beef, Sandhusker? They didn't all they said is that they INSPECTED IT . How can there be any fraud with the USDA label? BECAUSE YOU SAY THERE IS THAT HOW!!!!!!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
RM: "Organic consumers believe that "Organic" means it is safer food...does that mean the "Organic" label is consumer fraud?????????????"

Of course not! Organic beef means the beef is free from antibiotics or growth hormones. Organic being sold as "Organic" but containing implants and antibiotic residue would be consumer fraud.

If you want to draw a comparison, compare bse tested beef from cattle under 24 months of age to antibiotic tested beef which used an antibiotic test that would not detect antibiotics. That would be consumer fraud much like bse testing cattle under 24 months of age is.


RM: "Creekstone wants to use the same BSE test protocol as the Japanese to sell beef to the Japanese...is the Japanese government committing consumer fraud? Didn't the Japanese consumer demand 100% testing on their own beef???????????"

First, you don't know a damn thing about Japanese testing other than what your R-CULT brethren have told you. Tell me Robert, how many cattle does Japan bse test? What ages are those tested cattle? What bse tests does Japan use?

HEY, ROBERT, COME BACK, IT WAS JUST A FEW SIMPLE QUESTIONS TO CLARIFY YOUR STATEMENT.

If the Japanese consumers are demanding bse tested beef, why is there government importing non bse tested beef from Canada and the US?? Hmmmmm??? Does that make sense in your R-CULT world?


RM: "This consumer fraud argument is getting comical...how is it consumer fraud when you are giving the consumer what they are asking for?????????????"

The comedy is watching USDA blamers like you insist Japan wants bse tested beef while they import non bse tested beef from Canada and the US and the Japanese negotiators never mention a damn thing about testing.


Sandbag: "Creekstone wasn't planning on selling "BSE Free Beef". They were going to sell "BSE TESTED Beef"."

Oh, so the labels were going to say, "BSE TESTED BUT NOT BSE FREE"???

Ahhh.....hello?


Sandbag: "Another problem with you is that the Japanese are the ones who were asking for the tested beef."

Yeh, that's what you keep telling us Sandbag, meanwhile the Japanese are actually importing non tested beef but KEEP BELIEVING WHAT YOU WANT TO BELIEVE. Don't let the facts of actual Japanese beef imports get in your way.


SH (previous): "If Walmart wanted to sell "antibiotic free beef" based on a test that would not reveal antibiotics in the beef Walmart wanted to test and sell as "antibiotic free", WOULD YOU SUPPORT THEIR RIGHT TO TEST? YES OR NO?"

Sandbag (in response): "NO, I would not support Walmart if they used "free" in their label if they couldn't prove it."

Ok, then would you support Walmart using a label stating "antibiotic tested" if you knew they were using an antibiotic test that would not reveal antibiotics?

Yes or No?



OCM: "To paraphrase ~SH~. "The customer is WRONG. Shove it down his throat.""

To paraphrase OCM, "the flaming liberal", ignore the fact that Japan is importing non bse tested beef from the US and Canada, insist that they only import 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 so you can "BWAME USDA" like a good little R-CULT follower.


Mike: "Correct. It was the NCBA and AMI that wanted to label US beef going to Japan as "BSE FREE"............ WITHOUT a test!!!!!!!!!!"

Are you suggesting that beef from cattle under 24 months of age from the United States is not bse free?

If so, where's your proof?


Sandbag: "Creekstone is implying nothing. They said "BSE testing does not mean BSE free". Other than SH, who can't understand that statement? How can there be any implications after a statement that clear?"

Oh quit being such a deceptive SOB! You know damn well that anyone that buys BSE tested beef buys that beef under the assumption that
"bse tested" means "bse free". Otherwise, why would anyone test??? Only a complete idiot would defend such ridiculous logic.

Consumer in Sandbag's fantasy world, "I don't care if the beef has bse or not, I JUST WANT IT TESTED FOR BSE".

Frickin' idiot!

Creekstone had no intention of labeling their beef honestly as "BSE TESTED BUT NOT BSE FREE". They intended to capitalize on the ignorance of those consumers who believed that "BSE TESTED" meant "BSE FREE" when it clearly didn't.


~SH~
 

Mike

Well-known member
Quote:
Mike: "Correct. It was the NCBA and AMI that wanted to label US beef going to Japan as "BSE FREE"............ WITHOUT a test!!!!!!!!!!"


Are you suggesting that beef from cattle under 24 months of age from the United States is not bse free?

What the hell does 24 months have to do with it? :roll:

THEY wanted to apply the label to beef from ALL ages of cattle!!!!

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Had the USDA allowed Creekstone to test, Japan would have allowed all ages of cattle. :lol:

Now the packers are whining because they can't get enough beef under 21 months and they have to age verified.

You truly don't see the ridiculousness of this??????????? :shock:
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Tam, "The USDA is implying Nothing also They inspected all the meat to the same standards imported or not and found all the meat to be of the same standard. Where did the USDA say the meat was US beef, Sandhusker? They didn't all they said is that they INSPECTED IT . How can there be any fraud with the USDA label? BECAUSE YOU SAY THERE IS THAT HOW!!!!!!"

First of all, Tam, they don't inspect all the imported meat. As a matter of fact, very little of it is actually inspected by the USDA. The fraud is that the beef that is NOT inspected by the USDA receives the same stamp as product that is.

The USDA does NOT say that all the meat is US beef. However, consumers glance at the USDA stamp and sticker on their beef and that is the false perception they go home with and are never told any different. Why would they think any different?
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
SH, "Organic beef means the beef is free from antibiotics or growth hormones. Organic being sold as "

If you can't figure out that free from antibiotics or growth hormones means "safer" to consumers, you're a bigger idiot than you let on.

Quote:
RM: "This consumer fraud argument is getting comical...how is it consumer fraud when you are giving the consumer what they are asking for?????????????"


SH, "The comedy is watching USDA blamers like you insist Japan wants bse tested beef while they import non bse tested beef from Canada and the US and the Japanese negotiators never mention a damn thing about testing."

How about answering RM's question, SH?


Quote:
Sandbag: "Creekstone wasn't planning on selling "BSE Free Beef". They were going to sell "BSE TESTED Beef"."

SH, "Oh, so the labels were going to say, "BSE TESTED BUT NOT BSE FREE"??? Ahhh.....hello?"

Maybe you could tell us what Creekstone's labels were going to say?


Quote:
Sandbag: "Another problem with you is that the Japanese are the ones who were asking for the tested beef."


SH,"Yeh, that's what you keep telling us Sandbag, meanwhile the Japanese are actually importing non tested beef but KEEP BELIEVING WHAT YOU WANT TO BELIEVE. Don't let the facts of actual Japanese beef imports get in your way. "

Then why the millions being spent on "regaining their trust"?


Quote:
SH (previous): "If Walmart wanted to sell "antibiotic free beef" based on a test that would not reveal antibiotics in the beef Walmart wanted to test and sell as "antibiotic free", WOULD YOU SUPPORT THEIR RIGHT TO TEST? YES OR NO?"


Quote:
Sandbag (in response): "NO, I would not support Walmart if they used "free" in their label if they couldn't prove it."


SH, "Ok, then would you support Walmart using a label stating "antibiotic tested" if you knew they were using an antibiotic test that would not reveal antibiotics? Yes or No? "

They're not lying, so they can go for it.


Quote:
Sandbag: "Creekstone is implying nothing. They said "BSE testing does not mean BSE free". Other than SH, who can't understand that statement? How can there be any implications after a statement that clear?"


SH, "Oh quit being such a deceptive SOB! You know damn well that anyone that buys BSE tested beef buys that beef under the assumption that "bse tested" means "bse free". Otherwise, why would anyone test??? Only a complete idiot would defend such ridiculous logic. "

No, I don't know that, SH. I think they would buy it because it is a cheap way to have a little more assurance.


SH, "Creekstone had no intention of labeling their beef honestly as "BSE TESTED BUT NOT BSE FREE". They intended to capitalize on the ignorance of those consumers who believed that "BSE TESTED" meant "BSE FREE" when it clearly didn't. "

You don't know what the consumers believe. If Creekstone is trying to capitalize on consumer ignorance (like pumping gas into packages to fool them into believing it is fresh or putting a USDA inspected label on product that is not USDA inspected), why did they make a public statement that BSE tested does not mean BSE free? That would go in the stupid criminal file.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandbag: "If you can't figure out that free from antibiotics or growth hormones means "safer" to consumers, you're a bigger idiot than you let on."

If it meant safer to "all consumers", which "consumers" implies, then nobody would be buying non organic beef would they?


Sandbag: "How about answering RM's question, SH?"

What's to answer? Nobody is asking for a test that will not reveal bse prions. That's exactly what Creekstone was going to give them.


Sandbag: " Maybe you could tell us what Creekstone's labels were going to say?"

You are the one defending Creekstone, you tell me what their labels would have said.


Sandbag: "Then why the millions being spent on "regaining their trust"?"

Because we had BSE you idiot!


Sandbag: "They're not lying, so they can go for it."

You liar! If Walmart was selling "antibiotic tested beef" with a test that would not detect antibiotic residue, you would be screaming "DECEPTION" just as you were when they used certain practices to enhance the red color of beef and just as you were claiming the packers were hiding foreign beef behind the USDA grade stamp. You are such a deceptive SOB you can't even be honest with yourself.


Sandbag: " No, I don't know that, SH. I think they would buy it because it is a cheap way to have a little more assurance."

Hahaha!

WHERE'S THE ASSURANCE IF THEY DIDN'T BELIEVE "BSE TESTED" MEANT "BSE FREE"????

You are such a liar. You know that any consumer who buys "BSE TESTED" beef buys it believing it's safer than "non bse tested beef". Who do you think you're kidding?


Sandbag: "You don't know what the consumers believe. If Creekstone is trying to capitalize on consumer ignorance (like pumping gas into packages to fool them into believing it is fresh or putting a USDA inspected label on product that is not USDA inspected), why did they make a public statement that BSE tested does not mean BSE free? That would go in the stupid criminal file."

They only made that statement to the USDA when cornered on their intentions. They had no intention of mentioning that important fact to the Japanese consumer so they could sell an "ILLUSION OF SAFETY" PROVIDING THAT JAPAN WOULD HAVE ALLOWED BSE TESTED BEEF TO BE IMPORTED.


~SH~
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Quote:
Sandbag: "If you can't figure out that free from antibiotics or growth hormones means "safer" to consumers, you're a bigger idiot than you let on."


SH, "If it meant safer to "all consumers", which "consumers" implies, then nobody would be buying non organic beef would they?

Not all consumers buy the organic image. You yourself said organic is not safer, and you're a consumer. The people who buy organic do so because they think it is safer. You said it isn't. By your definition, that is deception.


Quote:
Sandbag: "How about answering RM's question, SH?"


Sh, "What's to answer? Nobody is asking for a test that will not reveal bse prions. That's exactly what Creekstone was going to give them. "

You refuse to answer it don't you? You can't answer it. The question was on the Japanese Government, not Creekstone. Quit diverting and answer the question or go away.


Quote:
Sandbag: " Maybe you could tell us what Creekstone's labels were going to say?"


SH, "You are the one defending Creekstone, you tell me what their labels would have said. "

Creekstone was just a supplier - the retailer's labels would be the ones the consumer would see.


Quote:
Sandbag: "Then why the millions being spent on "regaining their trust"?"

SH, "Because we had BSE you idiot! "

But you said they accepted the science - they're buying non-tested beef. If they had, there would be no reason regain trust, their trust would be in the science.


Now run along back to the kiddies table. Tam is setting up for a tea party. If you get there quick, you can sit between Mrs. Beasley and Mr. Wuggle Bear.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandbag: "Not all consumers buy the organic image."

Exactly which directly contradicts your previous statement that "free from antibiotics or growth hormones means safer to consumers".

PICK A POSITION AND STICK WITH IT!

Either it's safer to all consumers or some just "BELIEVE" it's safer.


Sandbag: "You yourself said organic is not safer, and you're a consumer."

I said "organic is not safer" IF ALL WITHDRAWL TIMES ARE ADHERED TO. There is no guarantee that withdrawl times are always being adhered to so "organic" may be safer in some circumstances.


Sandbag: "The people who buy organic do so because they think it is safer. You said it isn't. By your definition, that is deception."

No Sandbag, I said it "COULD BE SAFER IF WITHDRAWL TIMES ARE NOT PROPERLY ADHERED TO WITH ANTIBIOTICS AND HORMONES".

Poor little Sandcheska, you just can't spin it to your favor can you?

There is no deception when organic is organic. The deception comes when someone claims "bse tested" without that beef guaranteeing to be "BSE FREE".


Sandbag: "Creekstone was just a supplier - the retailer's labels would be the ones the consumer would see."

Hahaha!

SO WHY TEST THEN?

If consumers aren't aware that the beef is even tested, WHY TEST???

You just keep chasing your tail trying to defend your consumer deception plan. You're a dandy!


Sandbag: "But you said they accepted the science - they're buying non-tested beef. If they had, there would be no reason regain trust, their trust would be in the science."

"THEY" meaning the Japanese government has accepted the science. If they hadn't accepted the science, they would be demanding the consumer fraud that you are advocating. That doesn't mean that every Japanese consumer knows that science. Because some Japanese consumers may not know the science certainly doesn't justify any company to capitalize on those fears by selling an "ILLUSION OF SAFETY" with fraudulent testing.


~SH~
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: Yeah, OK, SH. :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

It's impossible to have a rational talk with you, just impossible. Go ahead and live in your little world, I choose reality.
 

Tam

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
Tam, "The USDA is implying Nothing also They inspected all the meat to the same standards imported or not and found all the meat to be of the same standard. Where did the USDA say the meat was US beef, Sandhusker? They didn't all they said is that they INSPECTED IT . How can there be any fraud with the USDA label? BECAUSE YOU SAY THERE IS THAT HOW!!!!!!"

First of all, Tam, they don't inspect all the imported meat. As a matter of fact, very little of it is actually inspected by the USDA. The fraud is that the beef that is NOT inspected by the USDA receives the same stamp as product that is.

The USDA does NOT say that all the meat is US beef. However, consumers glance at the USDA stamp and sticker on their beef and that is the false perception they go home with and are never told any different. Why would they think any different?

Sandhusker: First of all, Tam, they don't inspect all the imported meat. As a matter of fact, very little of it is actually inspected by the USDA.
From the FSIS The USDA branch in charge of Food Safety Inspections
FSIS Activities
Under the Federal Meat Inspection Act, the Poultry Products Inspection Act, and the Egg Products Inspection Act, FSIS inspects all meat, poultry, and egg products sold in interstate commerce and reinspects imported products, to ensure that they meet U.S. food safety standards. More than 7,600 inspection personnel verify that regulations regarding food safety and other consumer protection concerns such as labeling, are met in nearly 6,500 meat, poultry, and egg processing plants. In slaughter plants, inspection involves examining, before and after slaughter, birds and animals intended for use as food. In egg processing plants, inspection involves examining, before and after breaking, eggs intended for further processing and use as food.

FSIS has many responsibilities in addition to these inspection activities. The Agency sets requirements for meat and poultry labels and for certain slaughter and processing activities, such as plant sanitation and thermal processing, that the industry must meet. FSIS tests for microbiological, chemical, and other types of contamination and conducts epidemiological investigations in cooperation with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) based on reports of foodborne health hazards and disease outbreaks. In addition, the Agency conducts enforcement activities to address situations where unsafe, unwholesome, or inaccurately labeled products have been produced or marketed.

To ensure the safety of imported products, FSIS maintains a comprehensive system of import inspection and controls. Annually, FSIS reviews inspection systems in all foreign countries eligible to export meat and poultry to the United States to ensure that they are equivalent to those under U.S. laws. Reinspection of all imported meat and poultry products entering the United States verifies that the country’s inspection system is working.
Oh Who are we to believe Sandhusker or the FSIS? :roll:

Sandhusker: The fraud is that the beef that is NOT inspected by the USDA receives the same stamp as product that is
According to the FSIS they do inspect all meat and reinspect the imported and inspect those plants allowed to export to the US But if you say so Sandhusker!!!! :wink:
But if SO why isn't R-CALF going after the USDA to Inspect all the meat? If R-CALF cared as much about the safety of the US beef as they do about SELLING US BEEF , they would be demanding the USDA inspect all the beef imported and domestic, not insisting that the country of origin be stamped on the package so consumer know what is and isn't US beef.

Taken from the R-CALF Keep US Beef Safe Fact sheet.
The USDA inspection stamp is false advertising. Many consumers believe that the USDA Inspection Stamp implies that meat products either come from U.S. cattle and/or have been inspected by U.S. government officials. The truth about the USDA Inspected Stamp is more complicated. The USDA stamp does not mean the meat is from cattle born and raised in the United States. It could be from any one of the 13 countries we import beef from.


It's not complicated because of the fact the beef wasn't inspected making sure it is safe , it's complicated because "It could be from any one of the 13 countries we import beef from." Oldtimer keeps saying just label it and let the consumer decide, Would it not be smarter to inspect all the meat to make sure all the beef is safe NO MATTER WHERE IT COMES FROM? Is the health risk less if the consumer knows it came from the US and not from say one of those 13 other countries you import from that are BSE free or a country that didn't have a BSE positive cow in their food chain? :roll: All R-CALF cares about is labeling it so US consumers will know what is US beef. If they truly cared about the safety they would not be standing in the way of a system that could identify the birthherd and possible source of the next US BSE positve animal in days instead of WEEKS AND MONTH OR LIKE THE LAST TWO NEVER, that will be putting the US consumers at a genuine risk of death. :wink:

Sandhusker: However, consumers glance at the USDA stamp and sticker on their beef and that is the false perception they go home with and are never told any different. Why would they think any different?

Just how many media articles do you think have been put out on the fact that the US imports beef verses those put out about the BSE testing doesn't mean BSE Free? Google results in .20 sec. on "US imports Beef" 4,800,000 hits. results on "US imports beef from Canada" in .25 sec. 2,250,000 Google results on "BSE testing doesn't mean BSE FREE" in .49 sec. 116,000 hits.

But you keep insisting consumers don't know the US imports billions of dollars worth of beef per year and has for DECADES therefore the USDA INSPECTED label that has been on meat sold in the US forever is falsely believed to mean US BEEF. But you expect us to believe on your word that those same consumers will know that a new label that shows up on their beef that reads "BSE TESTED" doesn't mean BSE FREE. What are the chances of them reading an article where Creekstone admitts the testing they plan to use for the Japanese market doesn't prove the beef is BSE free due to the age of the animal when they missed 4,800,000 articles on the fact the US imports beef? :roll:
 

ocm

Well-known member
In the US the USDA inspectors must be personally present in order to inspect all beef in a processing plant. If they are not, then the stamp cannot be applied.

For foreign meat they need not be present. This is a double standard.
 

RobertMac

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
First of all, Tam, they don't inspect all the imported meat. As a matter of fact, very little of it is actually inspected by the USDA.

FSIS said:
To ensure the safety of imported products, FSIS maintains a comprehensive system of import inspection and controls. Annually, FSIS reviews inspection systems in all foreign countries eligible to export meat and poultry to the United States to ensure that they are equivalent to those under U.S. laws. Reinspection of all imported meat and poultry products entering the United States verifies that the country’s inspection system is working.

Tam said:
Oh Who are we to believe Sandhusker or the FSIS?

Tam, if you looked into the FSIS site (research took just a few minutes) instead of relying on google to find your information, you would have found the truth on imported meat presented, re-inspected, and rejected.

Only a little over 10% is re-inspected...THAT'S REAL CLOSE TO "VERY LITTLE"!!!!

Oh Who are we to believe Sandhusker or Tam?????? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
 

RobertMac

Well-known member
SH said:
Quote:
RM: "Organic consumers believe that "Organic" means it is safer food...does that mean the "Organic" label is consumer fraud?????????????"


Of course not! Organic beef means the beef is free from antibiotics or growth hormones.....

SH, you should research what the use of "Organic" on a label requires before you make any more statements that make you look foolish.

SH said:
Quote:
RM: "Creekstone wants to use the same BSE test protocol as the Japanese to sell beef to the Japanese...is the Japanese government committing consumer fraud? Didn't the Japanese consumer demand 100% testing on their own beef???????????"


First, you don't know a damn thing about Japanese testing other than what your R-CULT brethren have told you. Tell me Robert, how many cattle does Japan bse test? What ages are those tested cattle? What bse tests does Japan use?

HEY, ROBERT, COME BACK, IT WAS JUST A FEW SIMPLE QUESTIONS TO CLARIFY YOUR STATEMENT.

If the Japanese consumers are demanding bse tested beef, why is there government importing non bse tested beef from Canada and the US?? Hmmmmm??? Does that make sense in your R-CULT world?


Companies in foreign countries that want to import meat into the USA must have an inspection protocol that is equivalent to the USDA inspection protocol. Creekstone wants to use a protocol that is equivalent to the Japanese protocol to be able to ship meat to Japan. What's the difference?????

Would you approve of Creekstone testing OTM cattle for shipping to Japan?????

SH said:
Quote:
RM: "This consumer fraud argument is getting comical...how is it consumer fraud when you are giving the consumer what they are asking for?????????????"


The comedy is watching USDA blamers like you insist Japan wants bse tested beef while they import non bse tested beef from Canada and the US and the Japanese negotiators never mention a damn thing about testing.


Because the market is diversified, doesn't legitimize denying a company access to part of that market.
 

Tam

Well-known member
RobertMac said:
Sandhusker said:
First of all, Tam, they don't inspect all the imported meat. As a matter of fact, very little of it is actually inspected by the USDA.

FSIS said:
To ensure the safety of imported products, FSIS maintains a comprehensive system of import inspection and controls. Annually, FSIS reviews inspection systems in all foreign countries eligible to export meat and poultry to the United States to ensure that they are equivalent to those under U.S. laws. Reinspection of all imported meat and poultry products entering the United States verifies that the country’s inspection system is working.

Tam said:
Oh Who are we to believe Sandhusker or the FSIS?

Tam, if you looked into the FSIS site (research took just a few minutes) instead of relying on google to find your information, you would have found the truth on imported meat presented, re-inspected, and rejected.

Only a little over 10% is re-inspected...THAT'S REAL CLOSE TO "VERY LITTLE"!!!!

Oh Who are we to believe Sandhusker or Tam?????? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

IF so then why isn't your organization going after them to re-inspect more of it, to make sure it is safe?????? Instead of just demanding it be label to country of origin so the consumers can make up their own minds? :? Does the safety of US beef consumers mean so little to you that you will allow unsafe beef into the country as long as it is labeled to where it came from? :roll: And if the FSIS says they are re-inspecting the imported and they are not then what makes you think they are inspecting all US beef? And how much danger are US consumers in from eating US beef since your beef comes from a country affected by BSE TOO ????? Come on RobertMac tells us what makes your beef any different than any other BSE affected country if it is your Food Safety Inspection Service that is the one not doing their job??? :roll:
 

RobertMac

Well-known member
Tam said:
IF so then...yadda, yadda, yadda....

Did you look at the numbers, Tam????? Obviously not! :???:
You're not sucking me into your HAF (Hate America First) argument in your alternative reality.
 

Tam

Well-known member
RobertMac said:
Tam said:
IF so then...yadda, yadda, yadda....

Did you look at the numbers, Tam????? Obviously not! :???:
You're not sucking me into your HAF (Hate America First) argument in your alternative reality.

Does it matter if I look at the number you said they were inspecting only a little over 10% and if you are right as you think you are then Why hasn't your organization went after them for not inspecting more? :? Does the label that your organization demands be put on somehow make the meat safer for your consumers? Or is this a case of it really doesn't matter if the meat is safe as long as the US doesn't take the blame? That shows how much you really care about the health of the consumer doesn't it. :roll:
 

mrj

Well-known member
Tam said:
RobertMac said:
Tam said:
IF so then...yadda, yadda, yadda....

Did you look at the numbers, Tam????? Obviously not! :???:
You're not sucking me into your HAF (Hate America First) argument in your alternative reality.

Does it matter if I look at the number you said they were inspecting only a little over 10% and if you are right as you think you are then Why hasn't your organization went after them for not inspecting more? :? Does the label that your organization demands be put on somehow make the meat safer for your consumers? Or is this a case of it really doesn't matter if the meat is safe as long as the US doesn't take the blame? That shows how much you really care about the health of the consumer doesn't it. :roll:

Tam, you almost nailed it for the COOL supporting, Canadian cattle hating people.

It isn't just the US they don't want blamed, it is the possibility of an individual being fingered as having cattle with a problem.

While that could be devastating, I sure would want to know if my cattle had a problem, and I most certainly would want to know of the guy up the road has a problem that could affect my cattle.

In this era of probable and relatively easily achieved, intentional spreading of diseases, it seems like insanity to refuse to use verifiable, individual animal ID.

However I'm not sure I want it mandatory. It is such a hassle to convince everyone with a conspiracy mentality of the necessity. OTH, they will likely never admit their cattle could be the cause of disease to neighbors.

Sorry to digress a bit.

MRJ
 

Latest posts

Top