HEY BOYS

[Ben Roberts]

AGAIN Ben is basing his "researched" version on a report from the CCIA saying the cattle were exported on Nov 23, 2006 . I'm basing mine on the USDA, backed up a plant, FSIS, USDA APHIS, port vets, customs, CFIA, private vet in Canada, the Canadian shipper and Dr. Holland a State Vet that is know to critize the USDA handling of issues that says these cattle were exported on Nov 28th. But for some reason you doubt mine and take Bens without any proof, as in a simple quote from the claimed CCIA report . Are you not at the least interested in why he has yet to back his and only his version? Come on eCON be fair ask Ben to provide something to back his claim the cattle left Canada on Nov. 23 and not on Nov 28. Or are you not interested in which version is the truth. :wink:

AGAIN, Tam, you are not even acknowledging the plight of the producer who had to raise a huge ruckus and wait 47 days for his pay, your argument with Ben notwithstanding.

I believe the documents in question should have been provided to Van Dyke. When the government (USDA in this case) has control of all of the information and is not transparent, there is doubt to be had.

I am interested in Ben's version and where he might have obtained his information. That is one reason I haven't whole heartedly said he was right, although he may very well be.

My argument is that the information should not be only in the hands of the USDA. The USDA and Swift owe Mr. Van Dyke more than that.

Wouldn't you agree or do you still want to ignore the producer's concern once again?

eCON Van Dyke got his money, his plight was over when the Swift check cleared the bank. What is at stake now is the PLIGHT OF THOUSANDS OF CANADIAN PRODUCERS and their ability to export. Does their plight not matter to you? Could it be because it doesn't directly affect YOU?
The USDA was the agency that was in charge of collecting the information but that information was in the hands of many people. That is the exact reason that Dr. Holland believes that this is not a conspiracy to cover up anything. There are TO MANY PEOPLE INVOLVED.
Please give me one good reason Dr. Holland would go on record supporting the evidence if he had any questions about that evidence!!!

The thing about Ben's version is that he has yet to back the claim it came from a CCIA report. WHY? Do you care why he is willing to add to the plight of thousands of Canadian Producers by making statements that he is not willing to back up. AS long as there is somebody to fuel this story with more unproven claims, this story will add to the ongoing PLIGHT OF THOUSANDS. Not that that matters to you!!!! :roll: :roll: :roll:

I, will back up, every claim that I have made! True, the Van Dyke family has beed paid, the reason this continues is not because they want to see (THE PLIGHT OF THOUSANDS OF CANADIAN PRODUCERS) it's because they don't want another cattle producer, from both sides of the 49th parallel, to go through what they went through, for forty nine days.

Also, the information that the USDA collected, was only in the hands of two parties, not many people as they claim. The first, was the person, that made out the original forms, the second, was the person that received those forms, the rest, would have only been copies.


Best Regards
Ben Roberts

 

[Econ101]

AGAIN Ben is basing his "researched" version on a report from the CCIA saying the cattle were exported on Nov 23, 2006 . I'm basing mine on the USDA, backed up a plant, FSIS, USDA APHIS, port vets, customs, CFIA, private vet in Canada, the Canadian shipper and Dr. Holland a State Vet that is know to critize the USDA handling of issues that says these cattle were exported on Nov 28th. But for some reason you doubt mine and take Bens without any proof, as in a simple quote from the claimed CCIA report . Are you not at the least interested in why he has yet to back his and only his version? Come on eCON be fair ask Ben to provide something to back his claim the cattle left Canada on Nov. 23 and not on Nov 28. Or are you not interested in which version is the truth. :wink:

AGAIN, Tam, you are not even acknowledging the plight of the producer who had to raise a huge ruckus and wait 47 days for his pay, your argument with Ben notwithstanding.

I believe the documents in question should have been provided to Van Dyke. When the government (USDA in this case) has control of all of the information and is not transparent, there is doubt to be had.

I am interested in Ben's version and where he might have obtained his information. That is one reason I haven't whole heartedly said he was right, although he may very well be.

My argument is that the information should not be only in the hands of the USDA. The USDA and Swift owe Mr. Van Dyke more than that.

Wouldn't you agree or do you still want to ignore the producer's concern once again?

eCON Van Dyke got his money, his plight was over when the Swift check cleared the bank. What is at stake now is the PLIGHT OF THOUSANDS OF CANADIAN PRODUCERS and their ability to export. Does their plight not matter to you? Could it be because it doesn't directly affect YOU?
The USDA was the agency that was in charge of collecting the information but that information was in the hands of many people. That is the exact reason that Dr. Holland believes that this is not a conspiracy to cover up anything. There are TO MANY PEOPLE INVOLVED.
Please give me one good reason Dr. Holland would go on record supporting the evidence if he had any questions about that evidence!!!

The thing about Ben's version is that he has yet to back the claim it came from a CCIA report. WHY? Do you care why he is willing to add to the plight of thousands of Canadian Producers by making statements that he is not willing to back up. AS long as there is somebody to fuel this story with more unproven claims, this story will add to the ongoing PLIGHT OF THOUSANDS. Not that that matters to you!!!! :roll: :roll: :roll:

So again, you have fallen into the trap, Tam. You have put your self interests (and in this case they are assumed interests) over the rights of individual producers. It is the old divide and conquer mentality. You have fallen for it again. You are so darn scared that this will mean that Canada does not get to keep exporting to the U.S. that you are willing to roll over the facts and the harm Swift did to an individual producer.

Why can't you be strong enough to have both?

The fact that you can''t is the one reason packers will continue to have control over the markets, decreasing the market equilibrium and becoming more concentrated. When they are concentrated enough, they will do all sorts of things (like underbidding just to put someone out of business--not necessarily to make a profit) and then increase their margins. Anyone not playing the game as they want it played will be squashed. Then their margins increase and your profitability decreases.

If you hadn't bought that bunch of crock about animal ID and instead invested in an economical live BSE test, you wouldn't have to worry about your exports to the U.S. You may have had some flack about your industry being controlled by the same packers who have market power here in the U.S. but I think your govt. could have handled that one with the threat of BSE embargo out of the way.

You are nothing more than a puppet to people who are way smarter than you will ever be, Tam.

That is the sad thing about it. Even when it is pointed out to you, you continue down the same path.

Kinda reminds me of cows that won't get out of the road and let you pass. They could take 4 steps out of the way, but no, they have to go 100 steps in the way before catching on. I see you haven't caught on yet.

Your actions are predictable by those pulling the puppet strings.

 

[Tam]

AGAIN, Tam, you are not even acknowledging the plight of the producer who had to raise a huge ruckus and wait 47 days for his pay, your argument with Ben notwithstanding.

I believe the documents in question should have been provided to Van Dyke. When the government (USDA in this case) has control of all of the information and is not transparent, there is doubt to be had.

I am interested in Ben's version and where he might have obtained his information. That is one reason I haven't whole heartedly said he was right, although he may very well be.

My argument is that the information should not be only in the hands of the USDA. The USDA and Swift owe Mr. Van Dyke more than that.

Wouldn't you agree or do you still want to ignore the producer's concern once again?

eCON Van Dyke got his money, his plight was over when the Swift check cleared the bank. What is at stake now is the PLIGHT OF THOUSANDS OF CANADIAN PRODUCERS and their ability to export. Does their plight not matter to you? Could it be because it doesn't directly affect YOU?
The USDA was the agency that was in charge of collecting the information but that information was in the hands of many people. That is the exact reason that Dr. Holland believes that this is not a conspiracy to cover up anything. There are TO MANY PEOPLE INVOLVED.
Please give me one good reason Dr. Holland would go on record supporting the evidence if he had any questions about that evidence!!!

The thing about Ben's version is that he has yet to back the claim it came from a CCIA report. WHY? Do you care why he is willing to add to the plight of thousands of Canadian Producers by making statements that he is not willing to back up. AS long as there is somebody to fuel this story with more unproven claims, this story will add to the ongoing PLIGHT OF THOUSANDS. Not that that matters to you!!!! :roll: :roll: :roll:

I, will back up, every claim that I have made! True, the Van Dyke family has beed paid, the reason this continues is not because they want to see (THE PLIGHT OF THOUSANDS OF CANADIAN PRODUCERS) it's because they don't want another cattle producer, from both sides of the 49th parallel, to go through what they went through, for forty nine days.

Also, the information that the USDA collected, was only in the hands of two parties, not many people as they claim. The first, was the person, that made out the original forms, the second, was the person that received those forms, the rest, would have only been copies.


Best Regards
Ben Roberts

Then Please provide proof of the claimed CCIA report.

 

[Kato]

How come when this all came up, the big fuss was about how illegal Canadian cattle had been sold through a sale barn. Canadian cattle weren't being monitored, and rules weren't being followed. :shock: :shock: Close the border!!! The sky is falling!!

Now that we know that's not the case, everybody says that this was all about how a producer didn't get paid for his cattle?

Spin it however it works out best at the moment? :?

In our eyes these are two different things.

We don't like that he didn't get paid any more than you guys do. What we also don't like is Canadian cattle and cattle producers being used as convenient political tools to further the agenda to keep the border closed. Especially when there is no truth to the allegations.

 

[Bill]

How come when this all came up, the big fuss was about how illegal Canadian cattle had been sold through a sale barn. Canadian cattle weren't being monitored, and rules weren't being followed. :shock: :shock: Close the border!!! The sky is falling!!

Now that we know that's not the case, everybody says that this was all about how a producer didn't get paid for his cattle?

Spin it however it works out best at the moment? :?

In our eyes these are two different things.

We don't like that he didn't get paid any more than you guys do. What we also don't like is Canadian cattle and cattle producers being used as convenient political tools to further the agenda to keep the border closed. Especially when there is no truth to the allegations.

Yep it was just another chapter in the continuing saga of trying to target Canada and influence the decision on the reopening of the border to Canadian OTMs.

It is great to see those same folks getting their long overdue moment in the media and limelight for other reasons thanks to Team Bill!

 

[mrj]

Thanks Ben.

I'm 30 miles from Kadoka, so PM me if you are going to be in the area.

I have some problem with the sequence of events the Van Dykes experienced, such as what they did and when they did it in order to get their money.

Having been away for some time, I read young Van Dykes posts quickly and may not have it accurately, but it seems to me when they got the message they were not to be paid, they went to SD Senators and Representatives' offices for help.



Wouldn't most producers go first back to the sale barn, the Animal Industry board if it was claimed by the packer to be a health problem, also maybe to their banker, asking for help? Then maybe their attorney, then whichever cattle org they belonged to? Do I understand correctly that they did not belong to SDSGA till after the problem began? Not that it matters.

As to why the packer didn't address those issues immediately, if they believed the problem to be illegally imported Canadian cattle, wouldn't addressing that problem normally take some time, given our dearth of real animal tracking ability if the animals were not branded?

I'm not, as the person calling himself 'Econ' sometimes accuses me of, making excuses for the packers.......I'm merely posing possible reasons for the problem other than his usual accusation of "cheating the helpless, downtrodden cattle producer".

When there is a problem, it seems reasonable to mentally trouble-shoot and search ones own mind, and ask anyone deemed to possibly have some clues to help in the effort, possibly first using the media as tool in the search for answers to our questions, rather than in an accusatory manner.

MRJ

 

[Tam]

Thanks Ben.

I'm 30 miles from Kadoka, so PM me if you are going to be in the area.

I have some problem with the sequence of events the Van Dykes experienced, such as what they did and when they did it in order to get their money.

Having been away for some time, I read young Van Dykes posts quickly and may not have it accurately, but it seems to me when they got the message they were not to be paid, they went to SD Senators and Representatives' offices for help.



Wouldn't most producers go first back to the sale barn, the Animal Industry board if it was claimed by the packer to be a health problem, also maybe to their banker, asking for help? Then maybe their attorney, then whichever cattle org they belonged to? Do I understand correctly that they did not belong to SDSGA till after the problem began? Not that it matters.

As to why the packer didn't address those issues immediately, if they believed the problem to be illegally imported Canadian cattle, wouldn't addressing that problem normally take some time, given our dearth of real animal tracking ability if the animals were not branded?

I'm not, as the person calling himself 'Econ' sometimes accuses me of, making excuses for the packers.......I'm merely posing possible reasons for the problem other than his usual accusation of "cheating the helpless, downtrodden cattle producer".

When there is a problem, it seems reasonable to mentally trouble-shoot and search ones own mind, and ask anyone deemed to possibly have some clues to help in the effort, possibly first using the media as tool in the search for answers to our questions, rather than in an accusatory manner.

MRJ

The thing that sticks out in Young Van Dyke's story in my mind MRJ, is the fact they went to Senator THUNE and he claims Thune wasn't interested enough to even call the Van Dyke family back.

This is a Senator that is looking for reasons to keep the border closed and HE WASN"T INTERESTED ENOUGH IN ILLEGAL CANADIAN CATTLE BEING SOLD THROUGH SOUTH DAKOTA SALE BARNS TO CALL BACK. :shock: How about the Surrounding States Senators that were/are looking for reason why didn't they stand up for Van Dykes if their story had any credibility??

Add to that the fact that a State vet that has posted a comment opposing Rule Two, VERIFIED the USDA's evidence and said the evidence was complete and it showed the cattle came from Canada on Nov 28 2006 Tells me that the Van Dyke story was weak from the start and no Senator was going to get involve because it was.

 

[Econ101]

Thanks Ben.

I'm 30 miles from Kadoka, so PM me if you are going to be in the area.

I have some problem with the sequence of events the Van Dykes experienced, such as what they did and when they did it in order to get their money.

Having been away for some time, I read young Van Dykes posts quickly and may not have it accurately, but it seems to me when they got the message they were not to be paid, they went to SD Senators and Representatives' offices for help.



Wouldn't most producers go first back to the sale barn, the Animal Industry board if it was claimed by the packer to be a health problem, also maybe to their banker, asking for help? Then maybe their attorney, then whichever cattle org they belonged to? Do I understand correctly that they did not belong to SDSGA till after the problem began? Not that it matters.

As to why the packer didn't address those issues immediately, if they believed the problem to be illegally imported Canadian cattle, wouldn't addressing that problem normally take some time, given our dearth of real animal tracking ability if the animals were not branded?

I'm not, as the person calling himself 'Econ' sometimes accuses me of, making excuses for the packers.......I'm merely posing possible reasons for the problem other than his usual accusation of "cheating the helpless, downtrodden cattle producer".

When there is a problem, it seems reasonable to mentally trouble-shoot and search ones own mind, and ask anyone deemed to possibly have some clues to help in the effort, possibly first using the media as tool in the search for answers to our questions, rather than in an accusatory manner.

MRJ

The thing that sticks out in Young Van Dyke's story in my mind MRJ, is the fact they went to Senator THUNE and he claims Thune wasn't interested enough to even call the Van Dyke family back.

This is a Senator that is looking for reasons to keep the border closed and HE WASN"T INTERESTED ENOUGH IN ILLEGAL CANADIAN CATTLE BEING SOLD THROUGH SOUTH DAKOTA SALE BARNS TO CALL BACK. :shock: How about the Surrounding States Senators that were/are looking for reason why didn't they stand up for Van Dykes if their story had any credibility??

Add to that the fact that a State vet that has posted a comment opposing Rule Two, VERIFIED the USDA's evidence and said the evidence was complete and it showed the cattle came from Canada on Nov 28 2006 Tells me that the Van Dyke story was weak from the start and no Senator was going to get involve because it was.

It is my understanding that Van Dyke called the senator because he wanted his money, not the paranoid reason you bring out Tam.

 

[Big Muddy rancher]

Thanks Ben.

I'm 30 miles from Kadoka, so PM me if you are going to be in the area.

I have some problem with the sequence of events the Van Dykes experienced, such as what they did and when they did it in order to get their money.

Having been away for some time, I read young Van Dykes posts quickly and may not have it accurately, but it seems to me when they got the message they were not to be paid, they went to SD Senators and Representatives' offices for help.



Wouldn't most producers go first back to the sale barn, the Animal Industry board if it was claimed by the packer to be a health problem, also maybe to their banker, asking for help? Then maybe their attorney, then whichever cattle org they belonged to? Do I understand correctly that they did not belong to SDSGA till after the problem began? Not that it matters.

As to why the packer didn't address those issues immediately, if they believed the problem to be illegally imported Canadian cattle, wouldn't addressing that problem normally take some time, given our dearth of real animal tracking ability if the animals were not branded?

I'm not, as the person calling himself 'Econ' sometimes accuses me of, making excuses for the packers.......I'm merely posing possible reasons for the problem other than his usual accusation of "cheating the helpless, downtrodden cattle producer".

When there is a problem, it seems reasonable to mentally trouble-shoot and search ones own mind, and ask anyone deemed to possibly have some clues to help in the effort, possibly first using the media as tool in the search for answers to our questions, rather than in an accusatory manner.

MRJ

The thing that sticks out in Young Van Dyke's story in my mind MRJ, is the fact they went to Senator THUNE and he claims Thune wasn't interested enough to even call the Van Dyke family back.

This is a Senator that is looking for reasons to keep the border closed and HE WASN"T INTERESTED ENOUGH IN ILLEGAL CANADIAN CATTLE BEING SOLD THROUGH SOUTH DAKOTA SALE BARNS TO CALL BACK. :shock: How about the Surrounding States Senators that were/are looking for reason why didn't they stand up for Van Dykes if their story had any credibility??

Add to that the fact that a State vet that has posted a comment opposing Rule Two, VERIFIED the USDA's evidence and said the evidence was complete and it showed the cattle came from Canada on Nov 28 2006 Tells me that the Van Dyke story was weak from the start and no Senator was going to get involve because it was.

It is my understanding that Van Dyke called the senator because he wanted his money, not the paranoid reason you bring out Tam.

So Econ tell us why he didn't get his money?

 

[Econ101]

Does it matter BMR? Swift was able to take his product and enforce what they perceived as the law independent of any official by not paying.

How many times have producers done the same to Swift?

 

[Ben Roberts]

MRJ, next time i'm through Kadoka I'll be sure and stop to visit, and i'll also give Scott a call.

MRJ, I got involved in this issue, because some of the people on this board, were making accusations, without any evidence, toward the Canadian cattle producers.

Then, Mr. Van Dyke's son posted on this board, that he would answer questions about the seven Canadian calves in question. Some of the cattle producers on this board, started throwing darts at him, so he said goodbye. Myself and some others, still wanted to know, about the Canadian calves, so I started investigating myself. I believe the Canadian calves were in this country legally. I also believe that some organizations thought they could use this issue, to control the border, some organizations want the border open to OTM cattle and meat, yet other organizations want it closed to OTM cattle and meat. I just want to find out the truth, about these calves. The Van Dyke family bought these cattle at a South Dakota sale barn, fed them for nine months, sold them to Swift, delivered them to Swift's Grand Island plant, and I believe their story.

Best Regards
Ben Roberts

 

[Tam]

MRJ, next time i'm through Kadoka I'll be sure and stop to visit, and i'll also give Scott a call.

MRJ, I got involved in this issue, because some of the people on this board, were making accusations, without any evidence, toward the Canadian cattle producers.

Then, Mr. Van Dyke's son posted on this board, that he would answer questions about the seven Canadian calves in question. Some of the cattle producers on this board, started throwing darts at him, so he said goodbye. Myself and some others, still wanted to know, about the Canadian calves, so I started investigating myself. I believe the Canadian calves were in this country legally. I also believe that some organizations thought they could us this issue, to control the border, some organizations want the border open to OTM cattle and meat, yet other organizations want it closed to OTM cattle and meat. I just want to find out the truth, about these calves. The Van Dyke family bought these cattle at a South Dakota sale barn, fed them for nine months, sold them to Swift, delivered them to Swift's Grand Island plant, and I believe their story.

Best Regards
Ben Roberts

Is anyone else confused here. :???:


What happen to the legally imported on Nov 23 backed up by the CCIA report timeline Ben? :?

 

[Bill]

MRJ, next time i'm through Kadoka I'll be sure and stop to visit, and i'll also give Scott a call.

MRJ, I got involved in this issue, because some of the people on this board, were making accusations, without any evidence, toward the Canadian cattle producers.

Then, Mr. Van Dyke's son posted on this board, that he would answer questions about the seven Canadian calves in question. Some of the cattle producers on this board, started throwing darts at him, so he said goodbye. Myself and some others, still wanted to know, about the Canadian calves, so I started investigating myself. I believe the Canadian calves were in this country legally. I also believe that some organizations thought they could use this issue, to control the border, some organizations want the border open to OTM cattle and meat, yet other organizations want it closed to OTM cattle and meat. I just want to find out the truth, about these calves. The Van Dyke family bought these cattle at a South Dakota sale barn, fed them for nine months, sold them to Swift, delivered them to Swift's Grand Island plant, and I believe their story.
Best Regards
Ben Roberts

Huh????

 

[mrj]

MRJ, next time i'm through Kadoka I'll be sure and stop to visit, and i'll also give Scott a call.

MRJ, I got involved in this issue, because some of the people on this board, were making accusations, without any evidence, toward the Canadian cattle producers.

Then, Mr. Van Dyke's son posted on this board, that he would answer questions about the seven Canadian calves in question. Some of the cattle producers on this board, started throwing darts at him, so he said goodbye. Myself and some others, still wanted to know, about the Canadian calves, so I started investigating myself. I believe the Canadian calves were in this country legally. I also believe that some organizations thought they could use this issue, to control the border, some organizations want the border open to OTM cattle and meat, yet other organizations want it closed to OTM cattle and meat. I just want to find out the truth, about these calves. The Van Dyke family bought these cattle at a South Dakota sale barn, fed them for nine months, sold them to Swift, delivered them to Swift's Grand Island plant, and I believe their story.

Best Regards
Ben Roberts

Ben, I'm not sure if you mean Scott H. or Scott J., but all of us getting together would make for interesting conversation. I might even be persuaded to make coffee or iced tea. Or buy it. Kadoka has great water......now, so it's safe to order iced tea there.

Used to be, the water at Murdo, Kadoka and Philip tasted pretty bad! Water at Midland just had a little radium in it and was hotter than blazes......till we got a treatment plant.

Thanks for the information, and your investigation, Ben.

I really am interested in which sale barns those cattle went through before they got to Huron, and how and why they were not correctly identified through them all, as well as when sold to Van Dykes, if they were legal or not.

MRJ

 

[Ben Roberts]

MRJ, next time i'm through Kadoka I'll be sure and stop to visit, and i'll also give Scott a call.

MRJ, I got involved in this issue, because some of the people on this board, were making accusations, without any evidence, toward the Canadian cattle producers.

Then, Mr. Van Dyke's son posted on this board, that he would answer questions about the seven Canadian calves in question. Some of the cattle producers on this board, started throwing darts at him, so he said goodbye. Myself and some others, still wanted to know, about the Canadian calves, so I started investigating myself. I believe the Canadian calves were in this country legally. I also believe that some organizations thought they could use this issue, to control the border, some organizations want the border open to OTM cattle and meat, yet other organizations want it closed to OTM cattle and meat. I just want to find out the truth, about these calves. The Van Dyke family bought these cattle at a South Dakota sale barn, fed them for nine months, sold them to Swift, delivered them to Swift's Grand Island plant, and I believe their story.
Best Regards
Ben Roberts

Huh????

Bill, i'm just saying that I believe that the cattle came into the US legally (not illegally as some were posting) before they were sold through the sale barn, to Mr. Van Dyke.

Ben Roberts

 

[Ben Roberts]

MRJ, next time i'm through Kadoka I'll be sure and stop to visit, and i'll also give Scott a call.

MRJ, I got involved in this issue, because some of the people on this board, were making accusations, without any evidence, toward the Canadian cattle producers.

Then, Mr. Van Dyke's son posted on this board, that he would answer questions about the seven Canadian calves in question. Some of the cattle producers on this board, started throwing darts at him, so he said goodbye. Myself and some others, still wanted to know, about the Canadian calves, so I started investigating myself. I believe the Canadian calves were in this country legally. I also believe that some organizations thought they could us this issue, to control the border, some organizations want the border open to OTM cattle and meat, yet other organizations want it closed to OTM cattle and meat. I just want to find out the truth, about these calves. The Van Dyke family bought these cattle at a South Dakota sale barn, fed them for nine months, sold them to Swift, delivered them to Swift's Grand Island plant, and I believe their story.

Best Regards
Ben Roberts

Is anyone else confused here. :???:


What happen to the legally imported on Nov 23 backed up by the CCIA report timeline Ben? :?

Tam, you are just going to, have to put your question, on hold for awhile until I finish my findings. When I finish, trust me, you will be the first to read about it.

Best Regards
Ben Roberts (private eye)

 

[Tam]

MRJ, next time i'm through Kadoka I'll be sure and stop to visit, and i'll also give Scott a call.

MRJ, I got involved in this issue, because some of the people on this board, were making accusations, without any evidence, toward the Canadian cattle producers.

Then, Mr. Van Dyke's son posted on this board, that he would answer questions about the seven Canadian calves in question. Some of the cattle producers on this board, started throwing darts at him, so he said goodbye. Myself and some others, still wanted to know, about the Canadian calves, so I started investigating myself. I believe the Canadian calves were in this country legally. I also believe that some organizations thought they could us this issue, to control the border, some organizations want the border open to OTM cattle and meat, yet other organizations want it closed to OTM cattle and meat. I just want to find out the truth, about these calves. The Van Dyke family bought these cattle at a South Dakota sale barn, fed them for nine months, sold them to Swift, delivered them to Swift's Grand Island plant, and I believe their story.

Best Regards
Ben Roberts

Is anyone else confused here. :???:


What happen to the legally imported on Nov 23 backed up by the CCIA report time line Ben? :?

Tam, you are just going to, have to put your question, on hold for awhile until I finish my findings. When I finish, trust me, you will be the first to read about it.

Best Regards
Ben Roberts (private eye)

Funny how some expected the USDA to release information from an OFFICIAL INVESTIGATION prior to the final results but you are not willing to back your claims of a time line backed up by a CCIA report :lol: . Could it be that you don't have anything to back that time line and are stalling hoping everyone will just forget about your claim of the existence of a CCIA report that contradicts what the CFIA verified for the USDA. :?

And just a hint Ben if those cattle were in the US without CAN brands not in an approved feedlot and being sold through a sale barn they were not there legally . :roll:

 

[Econ101]

Is anyone else confused here. :???:


What happen to the legally imported on Nov 23 backed up by the CCIA report time line Ben? :?

Tam, you are just going to, have to put your question, on hold for awhile until I finish my findings. When I finish, trust me, you will be the first to read about it.

Best Regards
Ben Roberts (private eye)

Funny how some expected the USDA to release information from an OFFICIAL INVESTIGATION prior to the final results but you are not willing to back your claims of a time line backed up by a CCIA report :lol: . Could it be that you don't have anything to back that time line and are stalling hoping everyone will just forget about your claim of the existence of a CCIA report the contradicts what the CFIA verified for the USDA.

And just a hint Ben if those cattle were in the US without CAN brands not in an approved feedlot and being sold through a sale barn they were not there legally.

So, Tam, you are saying that Ben is stalling but that Swift was not when they waited over a month to pay Van Dyke?

Who are you supporting, the producer or the packer?......again.

 

[Ben Roberts]

Tam, i'm not stalling, i'm jut not through with my findings yet, Don't worry about anyone forgeting about this issue, I won't let that happen.

Best Regards
Ben Roberts (private eye)

 

[Tam]

Tam, i'm not stalling, i'm jut not through with my findings yet, Don't worry about anyone forgeting about this issue, I won't let that happen.

Best Regards
Ben Roberts (private eye)

Ben it shouldn't take that much to back your claim of a CCIA report if you actually have a CCIA report. Do you have the report or don't you?