HEY BOYS

[Tam]

ocm: I haven't seen anything that says the SD State Vet has seen the evidence.

Article was posted by Tam quoting Dr Holland
Tam: Tell us again ocm how Dr Holland never saw the results of the ongoing USDA investigation.

ocm: Holland never claims to have seen the tag numbers from the 7 (or head in question.

Sandhusker: Can Sam Holland himself place those tags on the cattle Swift said they were from, or is he just taking their word?

eCON: "evidence would seem to indicate..." is a weasel statement. We still do not know for sure if Holland actually did the investigation, saw the records, or was just told what was found out.

Tam: Hey Sandhusker do us all a favor call Hollands office and ask him and report back to us.

Sandhusker: Gee, seems to me you're jumping to conclusions that he knows the tags match the cattle.




Now boys since none of you were man enough to contact Dr. Sam Holland I took it upon myself to email him and ask him a few questions. GUESS WHAT BOYS. South Dakota State Vet Dr. Sam Holland emailed me back. :nod: Want to know what he said?

I have seen photos of the tags that were taken from the animals in question. I have also received copies of the import health certificates and permits which show the same tag numbers. This information appears pretty irrefutable.------------- It doesn't seem that this could be a conspiracy to cover up by a plant, FSIS, USDA APHIS, port vets, customs, CFIA, private vet in Canada, as well as the Canadian shipper !!! Again, I think the investigation by USDA is thorough, painstaking, time consuming, and costly, but in the end the results will be conclusive. SDH


NOW Can we jump to the conclusion that Dr. S. D. Holland saw everything he needed to convince himself, the tags, cattle, import health certificates and permits all matched and there was no conspiracy to cover up any thing :wink:

Oh just in case you think I made it up here is the signature from the bottom of his email

Sam D Holland, DVM,
State Veterinarian, Exe. Secy.
South Dakota Animal Industry Board
Address and phone number are included but I'm not posting them

 

[Sandhusker]

He saw photos of the tags that the USDA says were from the cattle in question. He has to take their word that those tags were on those cattle. All he is saying is those tags matched paperwork.

What you have is prosecution saying Bill was the one who shot Frank because Frank was shot with a 357 and Bill has one - but no ballistics to prove it was Bill's 357. Holland's testimony would be worthless if this were in court.

 

[HAY MAKER]

Miss Tam,there is no differnce between Dr Holland seeing those pictures,than me seeing them,now if Dr Holland would state he cut the tags out of suspect cattle ears,you might have something,depending on Dr Holland's credibility and some detail.................good luck

 

[Tam]

Bull Sandhusker and Haymaker You are basing your whole belief that Van Dyke was right on the fact he saw some PHOTO's. Now you are saying Dr. Holland can't be right because he only saw some photos. The same photo's I might add. As I asked him if he had seen the pictures of the tags Swift sent to the Van Dyke family? and his answer was YES he had. Why can Van Dyke's prove the cattle were on their place from the PHOTO's but Dr Holland can verify they weren't with the same photo's? The reason is because you don't want to believe that Van Dyke was mistaken and Dr. Holland could possibly be right. This proves how desperate you are to believe in anything that shows this story to be a conspiracy. PATHETIC :roll:

 

[Econ101]

Here is the big question: If Swift took those pictures and had all the records, why does it take an investigation of the USDA to get Van Dyke his money? Seems to me this could all have been wrapped up in a day or so.

I still have a big problem with a buyer buying and then not paying. This even after the buyer destroys the evidence (and keeps pictures for future USDA investigators if it gets that far).

Tam, thanks for contacting Dr. Holland. I wish in this case you had real investigatory power. With out it, we just have to trust a chain of events that is dubious at best and at worst, a big cover up.

I have said before, this is not a Canadian producer problem, it is an Aphis, USDA and Swift competency problem.

 

[HAY MAKER]

Bull Sandhusker and Haymaker You are basing your whole belief that Van Dyke was right on the fact he saw some PHOTO's. Now you are saying Dr. Holland can't be right because he only saw some photos. The same photo's I might add. As I asked him if he had seen the pictures of the tags Swift sent to the Van Dyke family? and his answer was YES he had. Why can Van Dyke's prove the cattle were on their place from the PHOTO's but Dr Holland can verify they weren't with the same photo's? The reason is because you don't want to believe that Van Dyke was mistaken and Dr. Holland could possibly be right. This proves how desperate you are to believe in anything that shows this story to be a conspiracy. PATHETIC :roll:

Miss Tam the cattleman saw the tags in the cattle's ear's and verified they were one and the same from the photo's,Dr Holland never saw the tags in any cattle's ear's ............big differnce..............good luck

 

[Ben Roberts]

Tam, when you ask Dr. Holland the questions, did you ask him, or did he tell you the date on the health papers? I believe, in one of your post on here, you said that the cattle came across the border on November 28th. is that correct?

Ben Roberts

 

[Tam]

Here is the big question: If Swift took those pictures and had all the records, why does it take an investigation of the USDA to get Van Dyke his money? Seems to me this could all have been wrapped up in a day or so.

I still have a big problem with a buyer buying and then not paying. This even after the buyer destroys the evidence (and keeps pictures for future USDA investigators if it gets that far).

Tam, thanks for contacting Dr. Holland. I wish in this case you had real investigatory power. With out it, we just have to trust a chain of events that is dubious at best and at worst, a big cover up.

I have said before, this is not a Canadian producer problem, it is an Aphis, USDA and Swift competency problem.

Since I contacted my sources in Canada and brought you their comments about the Canadian Authorities helping in the investigation, the help that Oldtimer claimed was refused. And I posted a Rapid City Journal article quoting Dr Holland. And when you questioned whether he had seen the photo's himself or was just taking the USDA's word, I contacted Dr. Holland and provided you with what he said. Why don't you contact Swift and ask them this question? Do I have to do everything? When am I going to get paid for doing the rancher.net investigation into these animals. If you have questions contact somebody YOURSELF and bring something to the discussion besides accusations of a Conspiracy. Especially since the Canadian information and Dr. Holland's information wasn't good enough to prove my credibility to some on here. Let's see what you can bring to prove your take on things. OK :roll:

 

[Econ101]

Here is the big question: If Swift took those pictures and had all the records, why does it take an investigation of the USDA to get Van Dyke his money? Seems to me this could all have been wrapped up in a day or so.

I still have a big problem with a buyer buying and then not paying. This even after the buyer destroys the evidence (and keeps pictures for future USDA investigators if it gets that far).

Tam, thanks for contacting Dr. Holland. I wish in this case you had real investigatory power. With out it, we just have to trust a chain of events that is dubious at best and at worst, a big cover up.

I have said before, this is not a Canadian producer problem, it is an Aphis, USDA and Swift competency problem.

Since I contacted my sources in Canada and brought you their comments about the Canadian Authorities helping in the investigation, the help that Oldtimer claimed was refused. And I posted a Rapid City Journal article quoting Dr Holland. And when you questioned whether he had seen the photo's himself or was just taking the USDA's word, I contacted Dr. Holland and provided you with what he said. Why don't you contact Swift and ask them this question? Do I have to do everything? When am I going to get paid for doing the rancher.net investigation into these animals. If you have questions contact somebody YOURSELF and bring something to the discussion besides accusations of a Conspiracy. Especially since the Canadian information and Dr. Holland's information wasn't good enough to prove my credibility to some on here. Let's see what you can bring to prove your take on things. OK :roll:

While you did go through some effort, you did forget to ask (or you forgot to post) why it took Swift so long to pay if they had all the evidence in front of them. I appreciate your efforts here, Tam, but the fact remains you were more interested in your self interests than the interests of producers in general and in this case, Van Dyke. That would disqualify you from being an investigator with impartiality and therefore credibility.

 

[Tam]

Tam, when you ask Dr. Holland the questions, did you ask him, or did he tell you the date on the health papers? I believe, in one of your post on here, you said that the cattle came across the border on November 28th. is that correct?

Ben Roberts

Since I did not know for sure in the first email if he personally would be seeing the email I asked the questions like this

Dear Sirs:
There have been several news articles of late that have quoted Dr. Sam Holland on the issue of the seven Canadian cattle that were supposedly sold through a South Dakota sale barn to Mr. Jan Van Dyke. In the articles it states that Dr. Holland can verify these cattle were indeed exported from Canada on Nov. 28, 2006 on a sealed truck in direct route to the Swift plant in Nebraska. According to the articles Dr. Holland said the evidence shows these cattle could not have been on the Van Dyke farm. But because of a mix up at the Swift Plant they were mistaken as Van Dyke cattle.
As I'm a Canadian rancher and have great interest in the truth surrounding these cattle, I tend to believe what the USDA released as it was backed up by the CFIA and Dr. Holland. That it was nothing more than an unfortunate mix up at the Swift plant with legally imported cattle. But since some R-CALF members have questioned if Dr. Holland has indeed verified the cattle and their records to be the same cattle the Van Dykes were claiming to be at their farm, could you please tell me if Dr. Holland verified the tag numbers to be the same tags in the cattle in question? Has he seen the pictures of the tags Swift sent to the Van Dyke family? And has he personally seen the available records he was quote to have said proved the cattle did come from Canada on Nov 28, 2006?
I would appreciate any information you can provide. I would also like your permission to pass on, any information you see fit to release to me on this issue, to the gentlemen that seem to be doubting Dr. Holland's credibility on the ID of these cattle.


He replied to my email personally and I again emailed him with what I was going to pass on to you and his email back said

Tamela: that is fine ! thank you, Sam

I posted his reply for you to read his own words. If you have any further questions feel free to ask him as I proved he did see the evidence.

Just so you know I'm still in contact with him as of this morning and he has seen a few of the things that have been posted about his credibility into the issue. :wink:

 

[Tam]

Here is the big question: If Swift took those pictures and had all the records, why does it take an investigation of the USDA to get Van Dyke his money? Seems to me this could all have been wrapped up in a day or so.

I still have a big problem with a buyer buying and then not paying. This even after the buyer destroys the evidence (and keeps pictures for future USDA investigators if it gets that far).

Tam, thanks for contacting Dr. Holland. I wish in this case you had real investigatory power. With out it, we just have to trust a chain of events that is dubious at best and at worst, a big cover up.

I have said before, this is not a Canadian producer problem, it is an Aphis, USDA and Swift competency problem.

Since I contacted my sources in Canada and brought you their comments about the Canadian Authorities helping in the investigation, the help that Oldtimer claimed was refused. And I posted a Rapid City Journal article quoting Dr Holland. And when you questioned whether he had seen the photo's himself or was just taking the USDA's word, I contacted Dr. Holland and provided you with what he said. Why don't you contact Swift and ask them this question? Do I have to do everything? When am I going to get paid for doing the rancher.net investigation into these animals. If you have questions contact somebody YOURSELF and bring something to the discussion besides accusations of a Conspiracy. Especially since the Canadian information and Dr. Holland's information wasn't good enough to prove my credibility to some on here. Let's see what you can bring to prove your take on things. OK :roll:

While you did go through some effort, you did forget to ask (or you forgot to post) why it took Swift so long to pay if they had all the evidence in front of them. I appreciate your efforts here, Tam, but the fact remains you were more interested in your self interests than the interests of producers in general and in this case, Van Dyke. That would disqualify you from being an investigator with impartiality and therefore credibility.

ASK SWIFT YOURSELF Why should Dr. Holland or I speculate on why it took Swift so long to do the right thing. You and Your CONSPIRACY THEORIST wouldn't buy it even if I had a sworn affidavit from Swift and signed by the Pope himself anyway. Bring something to the discussion if you really care about the truth. :roll: :roll: :x

 

[Econ101]

In other words, Tam, you care about yourself only.

Like I said, you are no unbiased investigator for the truth.

You don't really care about producers if it doesn't include you.

 

[Ben Roberts]

Tam, i've also spent several hours on this issue, without pay, and don't expect any.

I, have never questioned Dr. Holland's credibility. There is an issue here though, I don't understand. The health certificate that Dr. Holland saw, with the ear tag numbers in question here, had a November 28th. date on it, CCIA, reports those same ear tag numbers crossing the border on November 23rd. How can that be?

Now, if those cattle came acrossed the border on the 23rd of November as CCIA reports, that would be on a (Wednesday), that would have put those cattle in Grand Island, Nebraska on the 24th of November (Thursday). No major beef packer, that I know of, has pen space or feeding ability to take care of those cattle, so I assume those cattle were slaughtered no later than November 25th. (Friday).

Van Dyke's load of cattle were delivered to the Grand Island, Nebraska plant on November 27th. (Sunday) Van Dyke's cattle were slaughtered on November 28th. ( Monday), the health certificate that Dr. Holland saw was dated November 28th. (Monday). Van Dykes cattle were already slaughtered before the Canadian load arrived at the Grand Island plant.

Best Regards
Ben Roberts (private eye)

 

[Tam]

In other words, Tam, you care about yourself only.

Like I said, you are no unbiased investigator for the truth.

You don't really care about producers if it doesn't include you.

Econ if you actually cared about the producer more than your conspiracy theroy. I would not have to keep asking your to contact SWIFT yourself. :roll: It is easier to discredit me than it is to provide any answers isn't it? What PRODUCER is really beneifiting from your claims that I don't care about producers? I think I have shown how much I care about producers as I have been one of very few that have tried to bring verified facts to this Discussion. Try bringing verifiable answers to a discussion just once eCON then maybe your creditiblity will see daylight again. :roll:

 

[Econ101]

In other words, Tam, you care about yourself only.

Like I said, you are no unbiased investigator for the truth.

You don't really care about producers if it doesn't include you.

Econ if you actually cared about the producer more than your conspiracy theroy. I would not have to keep asking your to contact SWIFT yourself. :roll: It is easier to discredit me than it is to provide any answers isn't it? What PRODUCER is really beneifiting from your claims that I don't care about producers? I think I have shown how much I care about producers as I have been one of very few that have tried to bring verified facts to this Discussion. Try bringing verifiable answers to a discussion just once eCON then maybe your creditiblity will see daylight again. :roll:

If only you were capable.

 

[Maple Leaf Angus]

In other words, Tam, you care about yourself only.

Like I said, you are no unbiased investigator for the truth.

You don't really care about producers if it doesn't include you.

econ, it is imbeciles like you that ran the Inquisition. Why don't you just get on with it and burn Tam at the stake. And then Bill. And then Cowsence. And all the rest of the Canadians.

Then you can start burning or drowning malcontents like mwj, Texan . . . and all those who don't see eye to eye with your horizontally challenged views.

As if you are any less biased or impartial than Tam, myself or any other poster on here. What evidence do you ever supply to prove that you are not just another protectionist hypocrite.

 

[Tam]

Tam, i've also spent several hours on this issue, without pay, and don't expect any.

I, have never questioned Dr. Holland's credibility. There is an issue here though, I don't understand. The health certificate that Dr. Holland saw, with the ear tag numbers in question here, had a November 28th. date on it, CCIA, reports those same ear tag numbers crossing the border on November 23rd. How can that be?

Now, if those cattle came acrossed the border on the 23rd of November as CCIA reports, that would be on a (Wednesday), that would have put those cattle in Grand Island, Nebraska on the 24th of November (Thursday). No major beef packer, that I know of, has pen space or feeding ability to take care of those cattle, so I assume those cattle were slaughtered no later than November 25th. (Friday).

Van Dyke's load of cattle were delivered to the Grand Island, Nebraska plant on November 27th. (Sunday) Van Dyke's cattle were slaughtered on November 28th. ( Monday), the health certificate that Dr. Holland saw was dated November 28th. (Monday). Van Dykes cattle were already slaughtered before the Canadian load arrived at the Grand Island plant.

Best Regards
Ben Roberts (private eye)

First of all the CCIA would not have verified the export the CFIA would have. According to an email I recieved

On Jan 22, CFIA told my sourse they had reported to USDA on Jan 19 that the tags belonged to fat cattle legally exported from Canada on Nov 28. The fats were transported in a sealed truck directly to the Swift plant in Nebraska.

I asked Dr Holland about the date I even mention it TWICE in my email and not once did he say anything about another date so I take that the date provided to me was correct to be NOV 28 2006

Now where did you come up with the dates you posted

 

[Econ101]

In other words, Tam, you care about yourself only.

Like I said, you are no unbiased investigator for the truth.

You don't really care about producers if it doesn't include you.

econ, it is imbeciles like you that ran the Inquisition. Why don't you just get on with it and burn Tam at the stake. And then Bill. And then Cowsence. And all the rest of the Canadians.

Then you can start burning or drowning malcontents like mwj, Texan . . . and all those who don't see eye to eye with your horizontally challenged views.

As if you are any less biased or impartial than Tam, myself or any other poster on here. What evidence do you ever supply to prove that you are not just another protectionist hypocrite.

Probably my advice to you to stop focusing on the remedies to the BSE problem that the packers have given you and work on a scientific test to exclude the possibility of bse like Japan.

Of course, you and others would rather play the game and rant about rcalf.

Where has that been beneficial?

 

[Maple Leaf Angus]

In other words, Tam, you care about yourself only.

Like I said, you are no unbiased investigator for the truth.

You don't really care about producers if it doesn't include you.

econ, it is imbeciles like you that ran the Inquisition. Why don't you just get on with it and burn Tam at the stake. And then Bill. And then Cowsence. And all the rest of the Canadians.

Then you can start burning or drowning malcontents like mwj, Texan . . . and all those who don't see eye to eye with your horizontally challenged views.

As if you are any less biased or impartial than Tam, myself or any other poster on here. What evidence do you ever supply to prove that you are not just another protectionist hypocrite.

Probably my advice to you to stop focusing on the remedies to the BSE problem that the packers have given you and work on a scientific test to exclude the possibility of bse like Japan.

Of course, you and others would rather play the game and rant about rcalf.

Where has that been beneficial?

S'funny, econ, I did not think to mention rcalf in that post, but just to humour you I will do so now.


R-CALF!!!!!


There, are you satisfied now sonny?

 

[Tam]

Soory Ben I forgot this one

On Feb 1, Dr John Clifford, the Chief Veterinary Officer for the United States, addressed the Canada-US Working Group at the NCBA Convention in Nashville. He told us that they had completed their investigation. He said that USDA has pictures of the tags and they have the export documentation with the matching tag numbers showing the cattle leaving Canada legally on Nov 28. Dr Clifford also spoke to some reporters and told them the same.

Now again provide something that supports your timeline if you please. If you doubt these quotes then contact Dr. Holland and ask him for yourself.