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

Hey Sandhusker

Help Support Ranchers.net:

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
Well Sandhusker I just spent some time reading on the R-CALF web site and guess what I found? You don't even have to read the whole thing just go to R-CALF's web site look up the Answering Brief of R-CALF USA to NMA's intervenor Application and read the second paraghaph of page 51 of the 75 page Briefing.

R-CALF USA never argued that there was a great risk to human health from resumed imports of cattle and beef from Canada"



They have told any one that will listen that they will be risking their lives if they eat Canadian beef and you know it, but just won't admit it.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
All right, I'll buy that.

Since you're familiar with their website, now find me where they did say "There is a great risk to human health from resumed imports of cattle and beef from Canada"
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
So was the PR man lieing about the statement are wasn't he?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandhusker: "Since you're familiar with their website, now find me where they did say "There is a great risk to human health from resumed imports of cattle and beef from Canada"

Oh for crying out loud.

That's what their injunction was based on. That's what their add in the Washington Post was based on.

If R-CULT didn't file their injunction based from a food safety standpoint, WHAT WAS IT BASED ON????

I can't believe you. You are such an R-CALF prostitute! When it comes to slithering around the truth, McDonnel and Bullard have nothing on you.



~SH~
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
~SH~ said:
Sandhusker: "Since you're familiar with their website, now find me where they did say "There is a great risk to human health from resumed imports of cattle and beef from Canada"

Oh for crying out loud.

That's what their injunction was based on. That's what their add in the Washington Post was based on.

If R-CULT didn't file their injunction based from a food safety standpoint, WHAT WAS IT BASED ON????

I can't believe you. You are such an R-CALF prostitute! When it comes to slithering around the truth, McDonnel and Bullard have nothing on you.



~SH~

What did they say, SH? Give me exact quotes. Yes, food safety was one of the reasons they filed - but what did they SAY?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandhusker: "What did they say, SH? Give me exact quotes. Yes, food safety was one of the reasons they filed - but what did they SAY?"

No, you give me the exact quotes. R-CALF is your organization, not mine.

If you don't even know what they are saying it proves that you are just a mindless follower.


~SH~
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
~SH~ said:
Sandhusker: "What did they say, SH? Give me exact quotes. Yes, food safety was one of the reasons they filed - but what did they SAY?"

No, you give me the exact quotes. R-CALF is your organization, not mine.

If you don't even know what they are saying it proves that you are just a mindless follower.


~SH~

Here's an exact quote from Bullard, "Hi, I'm Bill Bullard". Satisfied?

If you don't even know what they are saying, where do you see the room to critique?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Why wouldn't you know what your organization said in the Washington Post or in their USDA court injunction to keep the border closed?

Are you really that out of the loop?

You always want someone else to do your work for you so you can see whether or not you can slime your way around it.



~SH~
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
~SH~ said:
Why wouldn't you know what your organization said in the Washington Post or in their USDA court injunction to keep the border closed?

Are you really that out of the loop?

You always want someone else to do your work for you so you can see whether or not you can slime your way around it.



~SH~

I just got chewed out because of your last post - I laughed out so loud that I woke up my daughter who just fell asleep! :lol: :lol: :lol:

Either R-CALF argued "that there was a great risk to human health from resumed imports of cattle and beef from Canada" or they didn't. Seems they are innocent until proven guilty (haven't I seen you use that phrase before?). The balls in your court. Prove them guilty.

Maybe you should contact the "foundation". "Their" "staff" had to come up with the information somewhere.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Keep diverting from your inability to back your organizations conflicting statements. I would expect nothing less from you.



~SH~
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
~SH~ said:
Why wouldn't you know what your organization said in the Washington Post or in their USDA court injunction to keep the border closed?

Are you really that out of the loop?

You always want someone else to do your work for you so you can see whether or not you can slime your way around it.



~SH~

Every time I hear criticism of the Washington Post ad I have to relook at it---What is wrong with it? What on that ad is not true? What is wrong with promoting US beef as the best and safest in the world? NCBA and the checkoff should be doing the same.......Why should we lower our safety standards just so we can import from Canada? Why shouldn't the public be made aware that "their" bureaucrats have been playing fast and free with the rules- got caught- and have been chastised by the GAO, a Federal Judge, and the US Senate? In my eyes it promotes the US cattle producer as the key safeguard in guaranteeing the consumer safe, quality beef........

http://www.r-calfusa.com/BSE/MadCowWashPost_0311d.pdf
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
I'll tell you what is wrong with the add, it basically says that if the US has another case of BSE, our food will be unsafe. Unless you can explain to me how the precautionary measures Canada has taken are inadequate in comparison with ours, you don't have a leg to stand on OT.

"Four Canadian born and raised cattle have been identified with mad cow. Two since January."

"Mad cow is fatal in animals and linked to a fatal disease in humans. Yet, USDA bureaucrats are rushing to re-open the U.S. border to Canadian beef and cattle."

THAT SAYS CANADIAN BEEF IS UNSAFE!

THAT ALSO SAYS U.S. BEEF WILL BE UNSAFE IN THE EVENT THAT WE HAVE ANOTHER CASE OF BSE.

That's how incredibly naive R-CALF is!

They're not even smart enough to use the term BSE. They have to use the "FEAR MONGERING TERM" of "MAD COW". Typical of the deceptive, "end justifies the means" organization they really are.



~SH~
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
~SH~ said:
I'll tell you what is wrong with the add, it basically says that if the US has another case of BSE, our food will be unsafe. Unless you can explain to me how the precautionary measures Canada has taken are inadequate in comparison with ours, you don't have a leg to stand on OT.

"Four Canadian born and raised cattle have been identified with mad cow. Two since January."

"Mad cow is fatal in animals and linked to a fatal disease in humans. Yet, USDA bureaucrats are rushing to re-open the U.S. border to Canadian beef and cattle."

THAT SAYS CANADIAN BEEF IS UNSAFE!

THAT ALSO SAYS U.S. BEEF WILL BE UNSAFE IN THE EVENT THAT WE HAVE ANOTHER CASE OF BSE.

That's how incredibly naive R-CALF is!

They're not even smart enough to use the term BSE. They have to use the "FEAR MONGERING TERM" of "MAD COW". Typical of the deceptive, "end justifies the means" organization they really are.



~SH~

SH- The number one difference is Canada has 4 origin cases in a herd that is 1/20th the size of the US herd-one of these born after their feed ban was in effect-- the US has none...The difference is that the risk factor in their cattle and beef is higher....Should we not tell consumers the truth? Can you say there is NO human risk from Canadian beef? If so then you are better than all the scientists, because none say this......I suppose we should go back to the old NCBA way of thinking and baffle them with bullsh*t and educate them thar folks to the way we want them to think......
Thats right - I forgot- You don't believe in telling people the truth about the deceptive use of the USDA stamp- or believe that people should know what country their food comes from-- unless they are rich enough to cater in "branded beef"......Don't Ask-Don't Tell...........

Canada should test all until they find out the extent of the problem and can show its eradicated-- and if we find a domestic case we should do the same.......
 

Silver

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 23, 2005
Messages
5,150
Reaction score
26
Location
BC
SH- The number one difference is Canada has 4 origin cases in a herd that is 1/20th the size of the US herd

Not even close: do some more research

Thats right - I forgot- You don't believe in telling people the truth about the deceptive use of the USDA stamp

No faith in your inspectors? It's your governments "deceptive" use. Fix your system. Obviously it's flawed.

Canada should test all until they find out the extent of the problem and can show its eradicated-- and if we find a domestic case we should do the same.......

You should be very alarmed the US system can't find it's BSE. Definetly shows a flawed system that isn't up to snuff. Based on that inability to find what has to be there, I don't think anyone can take your system seriously. HUUUUHHHHHHHHH?????
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
Oldtimer said:
~SH~ said:
I'll tell you what is wrong with the add, it basically says that if the US has another case of BSE, our food will be unsafe. Unless you can explain to me how the precautionary measures Canada has taken are inadequate in comparison with ours, you don't have a leg to stand on OT.

"Four Canadian born and raised cattle have been identified with mad cow. Two since January."

"Mad cow is fatal in animals and linked to a fatal disease in humans. Yet, USDA bureaucrats are rushing to re-open the U.S. border to Canadian beef and cattle."

THAT SAYS CANADIAN BEEF IS UNSAFE!

THAT ALSO SAYS U.S. BEEF WILL BE UNSAFE IN THE EVENT THAT WE HAVE ANOTHER CASE OF BSE.

That's how incredibly naive R-CALF is!

They're not even smart enough to use the term BSE. They have to use the "FEAR MONGERING TERM" of "MAD COW". Typical of the deceptive, "end justifies the means" organization they really are.



~SH~

SH- The number one difference is Canada has 4 origin cases in a herd that is 1/20th the size of the US herd-one of these born after their feed ban was in effect-- the US has none...The difference is that the risk factor in their cattle and beef is higher....Should we not tell consumers the truth? Can you say there is NO human risk from Canadian beef? If so then you are better than all the scientists, because none say this......I suppose we should go back to the old NCBA way of thinking and baffle them with bullsh*t and educate them thar folks to the way we want them to think......
Thats right - I forgot- You don't believe in telling people the truth about the deceptive use of the USDA stamp- or believe that people should know what country their food comes from-- unless they are rich enough to cater in "branded beef"......Don't Ask-Don't Tell...........

Canada should test all until they find out the extent of the problem and can show its eradicated-- and if we find a domestic case we should do the same.......

Oldtimer what are you drinking tonight to make a statement like
The number one difference is Canada has 4 origin cases in a herd that is 1/20th the size of the US herd-
the Canadian herd is 1/7 the size and if it not then the US is really under testing. Canada is testing 30,000 and 20 times the size the US should be testing 600,000 head per year. 96 million head to 14 million head is just about 1/7 the size have R-CALF hire a math teacher please.

And Sandhusker I did your homework again. I would like to ask you how many times does a document have to have the words like "US consumer will be endangered", "risk of vCJD for US citizens from consumption of BSE contaminated meat", "How many US consumers may be at risk for contracting vCJD", to be a little over board and assuming great risk to US consumers. just about every page of the 36 page document has a reference to human health and the risk to it. The best one of all was on Page 8 number 17
In addition US consumers would be subjected to both greater and unneccessary risk of contracting and dying of vCJD if the United States deviated from its longstanding policy of prohibiting the importation of ruminants and ruminant products from any country known to have BSE.
Again from the R-CALF web page taken from the actual court brief to Cebull.
 

Brad S

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 15, 2005
Messages
3,017
Reaction score
0
Location
west of Soapweed
RCALF haters accuse RCALF of saying ""There is a great risk to human health from resumed imports of cattle and beef from Canada"

Sandhusker sez, yeah, that might be over the top if they said it, but I don't accept they said it until I'm shown the quote. Show me the quote against my interests is my challenge.

So SH says no you post the quote I accuse you of cause its your club. Trust me, Erlene Mandrell the telephone operator on hee haw has nothing on SH in logic scholarship.

So someone posts a bunch of RCALF quotes much less incindary than the accused quote, and Sandhusker's challengs goes unmet.

And some $hit for brains says "US bse detection sucks because they can't even find any" This is the kind of intellect that always cancells out my vote.


Brad sez Sandhusker is in danger of being dumbed to death.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
SH quoting R-CALF, ""Four Canadian born and raised cattle have been identified with mad cow. Two since January."
"Mad cow is fatal in animals and linked to a fatal disease in humans. Yet, USDA bureaucrats are rushing to re-open the U.S. border to Canadian beef and cattle."

So you're telling me these statements are not true? Are these more of your "R-CALF lies". :roll:
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
Brad S said:
RCALF haters accuse RCALF of saying ""There is a great risk to human health from resumed imports of cattle and beef from Canada"

Sandhusker sez, yeah, that might be over the top if they said it, but I don't accept they said it until I'm shown the quote. Show me the quote against my interests is my challenge.

So SH says no you post the quote I accuse you of cause its your club. Trust me, Erlene Mandrell the telephone operator on hee haw has nothing on SH in logic scholarship.

So someone posts a bunch of RCALF quotes much less incindary than the accused quote, and Sandhusker's challengs goes unmet.

And some s*** for brains says "US bse detection sucks because they can't even find any" This is the kind of intellect that always cancells out my vote.


Brad sez Sandhusker is in danger of being dumbed to death.

Thats about the way it's going.
 

Latest posts

Top