Just for you gunslinger

[Sandhusker]

SH, "Fact: Tyson lost more money in their U.S. plants than they gained in Canada WHILE THE U.S. BORDER WAS CLOSED TO CANADIAN LIVE CATTLE IMPORTS. PROVE ME WRONG CHEAP TALKER!!! Watch the babble and diversion....................... I was only wrong within calendar year 2004. That was my only mistake. My original statement stands as written and it will remain standing as written."

You sure seem adamant that you know what you're talking about. If you know that your statement is true, it would seem it would be easy to prove it. After all, in order to make that strong of a statement, you surely got the information somewhere. Why not just look it up and provide it? It's an easy $100 for your favorite charity.

It looks to me that even you realize you are FACTUALLY VOID. Who brought that term "factually void" to this board, anyhow? Could it of been you, Mr. Factually Void? Who also loves to say, "Talk is cheap"? Show us your talk is worth something, SH.

 

[Anonymous]

I'll pay R-CULT $100 if you can provide the proof that I lied when I said that "Tyson's Boise and Pasco plants lost more money while the Canadian border was closed to live cattle than Tyson's Lakeside plant made".

You pay NCBA $100 if I provide the proof AGAIN to support the above statement.

Those are the terms!

Do you accept these terms or not Sandbag?


~SH~

 

[Sandhusker]

I'll pay R-CULT $100 if you can provide the proof that I lied when I said that "Tyson's Boise and Pasco plants lost more money while the Canadian border was closed to live cattle than Tyson's Lakeside plant made".

You pay NCBA $100 if I provide the proof AGAIN to support the above statement.

Those are the terms!

Do you accept these terms or not Sandbag?


~SH~

No, I don't SH. I know it can't be proven either way. That's why I'm not throwing a fit and saying anybody made more money than anybody else - you're the one trying to BS everybody.

Why do accuse others of "not bringing the facts" and being "factually void", when you can't do bring anything? What is the glory in being a hypocrite? Where is this truth that you claim is your only bias?

Either you know what you're talking about or you don't. You don't know what you're talking about.

 

[Anonymous]

Sandbag: "No, I don't SH. I know it can't be proven either way. That's why I'm not throwing a fit and saying anybody made more money than anybody else - you're the one trying to BS everybody.'

Sandbag: "You don't know what you're talking about."

BWAHAHAHAHA!

What's wrong Sandbag?

If I'm BSing everyone and don't know what I'm talking about, why won't you put your money where your mouth is? You said I lied, here is your chance to prove it and make $100 for R-CULT and now you're backpeddling when I called your bluff. You chickensh*t. I knew you'd back down even after already having $100 in your bet bank already from my mistake and my willingness to admit it.

You can't prove that I lied and you won't accept the information I presented to prove that I was telling the truth. All anyone had to do was make a phone call to the Tyson office. All anyone has to do is look at the fact that Boise and Pasco were running at 35% of capacity for much of this time period then contrast that with the Canadian government's study on packer profitting in Canada that showed the expense of SRM removal. All anyone has to do is look at Tyson's report showing losses at Lakeside in 2005 while Pasco and Boise were sustaining huge losses. You wouldn't accept anything that didn't support your bias. I've already backed my position and Agman supported it and you thanked him for his honesty.

You are such a parasite!

OT: "I still say R-CALF owes you the membership recruitment award- you have convinced more of us than any other one person that I know."

You were a bought and paid for R-CULT clone long before you graced this site. You have a need to be accepted by fellow blamers so you can't accept the truth. Your inability to support your views is the same as most R-CULTers.

OT: "Oh by the way--Did you notice what most buyers were asking for this year in preperation for trade with the export countries- AFFIDAVITS with a SIGNATURE? You remember those things that you said were worthless and couldn't be used for M-COOL.... "

So why have brand inspection OT? Why not just have a signed affidavit proving ownership? But, but, but...... HYPOCRITE!

An affidavit and signature is only as valid as it's enforcement.

Why not just write the IRS a check this year without filling out a 1040? An affidavit and signature should suffice? Who needs audits?



~SH~

 

[Sandhusker]

Can you back your statement or not, SH? It looks to me like you are factually void. I say you're just spewing cheap talk. I don't don't think you know what you're talking about.

If you THINK you are right but don't know, qualify your statement as an opinion. If you KNOW you are right, provide the proof you continually demand of others.

 

[mrj]

Sandhusker in your little "guilty till proven innocent" for questions re. packers, are you just the least bit insecure of the facts here?

If you were truly certain, you surely would go for the bet.

You seem to be a very shrewd person, jumping into the bet when you realize the other guy mis-understood the deal, but not taking it when he just might have proof of the clear question on this one.

Says quite a bit about you, IMO.

MRJ

 

[Sandhusker]

Sandhusker in your little "guilty till proven innocent" for questions re. packers, are you just the least bit insecure of the facts here?

If you were truly certain, you surely would go for the bet.

You seem to be a very shrewd person, jumping into the bet when you realize the other guy mis-understood the deal, but not taking it when he just might have proof of the clear question on this one.

Says quite a bit about you, IMO.

MRJ

SH misunderstood the deal? :lol: There's a lot of things SH misunderstands, but I think you are the one who misunderstands the deal, MRJ! :lol:

If SH has "proof of the clear question", why can't he provide it? It's worth $100 to his favorite charity - what's holding him up? He keeps claiming his "original statement" was correct - didn't I propose that he couldn't prove it, either? I'm calling his bluff again, because he is bluffing. He's so full of crap, I have to close up the house when we get a North wind.

Why am I the bad guy? SH is continually demanding others back their statements - he tries to bully and belittle people by calling them names such as "factually void" and makes childish comments like "Talk is cheap, and none is cheaper than yours", but when the same is asked of him, he refuses to back his statements and demands to be proven wrong? That's one hell of a double standard, MRJ - but you chastise me?

I've heard nothing but good things about you personally in real life - I don't understand why you defend a hypocrite and shake your finger at the person who blows the whistle.

 

[Anonymous]

Sandbag: "No, I don't SH. I know it can't be proven either way. That's why I'm not throwing a fit and saying anybody made more money than anybody else - you're the one trying to BS everybody.'

Sandbag: "You don't know what you're talking about."

BWAHAHAHAHA!

What's wrong Sandbag?

If I'm BSing everyone and don't know what I'm talking about, why won't you put your money where your mouth is? You said I lied, here is your chance to prove it and make $100 for R-CULT and now you're backpeddling when I called your bluff. You chickensh*t. I knew you'd back down even after already having $100 in your bet bank already from my mistake and my willingness to admit it.

You can't prove that I lied and you won't accept the information I presented to prove that I was telling the truth. All anyone had to do was make a phone call to the Tyson office. All anyone has to do is look at the fact that Boise and Pasco were running at 35% of capacity for much of this time period then contrast that with the Canadian government's study on packer profitting in Canada that showed the expense of SRM removal. All anyone has to do is look at Tyson's report showing losses at Lakeside in 2005 while Pasco and Boise were sustaining huge losses. You wouldn't accept anything that didn't support your bias. I've already backed my position and Agman supported it and you thanked him for his honesty.

You are such a parasite!

OT: "I still say R-CALF owes you the membership recruitment award- you have convinced more of us than any other one person that I know."

You were a bought and paid for R-CULT clone long before you graced this site. You have a need to be accepted by fellow blamers so you can't accept the truth. Your inability to support your views is the same as most R-CULTers.

OT: "Oh by the way--Did you notice what most buyers were asking for this year in preperation for trade with the export countries- AFFIDAVITS with a SIGNATURE? You remember those things that you said were worthless and couldn't be used for M-COOL.... "

So why have brand inspection OT? Why not just have a signed affidavit proving ownership? But, but, but...... HYPOCRITE!

An affidavit and signature is only as valid as it's enforcement.

Why not just write the IRS a check this year without filling out a 1040? An affidavit and signature should suffice? Who needs audits?



~SH~

SH.. You can go back to my first posts about 3-4 years ago- At the time I'll admit I was disenchanted by NCBA because of the fact that I'd lost faith with any cattle organizations that would represent ranchers as supporting the fraud against consumers by passing off imported beef as a US product--I had always thought of ranchers as acting openly and honestly, rather than the shyster horse trader image they were now portraying to me....BUT I belonged to neither NCBA or R-CALF, only Farm Bureau...About a year of watching your "no facts, I'm always right BS" convinced me to look closer at what R-CALF was saying- and once I did and saw that at least they were trying to be open with the producer and the consumer I became a member....This was even more supported by the unorthodox Pickett ruling overthrowal, NCBA's unquestioning backing of the USDA's decisions, foulups, and in some cases out right fraud, and their switchover to becoming a Political Action Group.....

As one local former NCBA member ( who is now an R-CALF member) who used to post before the forum changed asked me the other day- "Is that radical nut NCBA guy from South Dakota still on there?"

But on behalf of R-CALF I thank you!!! :wink: :lol:

SH.. In Montana a SIGNED AFFIDAVIT is used to prove ownership even with brand inspection-- Affidavits like bill of sales or Certification of being home raised on "no brands"- they are affidavits... And these affidavits are double checked and spot audited along with the accompanying brand inspection......

Are all IRS filings audited?

 

[Tommy]

First SH said...BSE closed the border. The only reason Boxed beef and live cattle didn't open simultaneously is because R-CULT filed an injunction against USDA to stop the importation of live cattle, NOT BOXED BEEF!

Now he says...If USDA hadn't planned on opening the border to live cattle shortly after boxed beef, WHY DID R-CULT FILE THE INJUNCTION???

Scott for your information here is the timeline.

Imports of all cattle and beef products from Canada were halted May 20, 2003 following an announcement that bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) had been diagnosed in a beef cow in Alberta. Subsequent to an investigation into the source of this case, the U.S. resumed imports of boneless boxed beef from animals less than 30 months of age on September 1, 2003. Over one billion pounds of boneless boxed beef was imported into the U.S. from Canada in 2004.

On November 4, 2003 USDA published a proposed rule seeking to designate Canada as a 'minimal-risk' country for BSE and seeking to permit the importation of fed and feeder cattle less than 30 months of age, as well as beef products from animals of all ages under certain conditions. After reviewing more than 3,700 comments received on the proposed rule, USDA announced the publication of the final rule pertaining to this matter on December 29, 2004.

The importation of these products was scheduled to resume March 7, 2005. However, this was delayed by the issuance of a preliminary injunction by District Court Judge Richard Cebull in Billings, MT until July 14, 2005, when the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned Cebull's ruling and permitted the entry of live cattle less than 30 months of age and certain additional categories of beef from Canada.

 

[rkaiser]

Thank you Tommy.

 

[Jason]

Isn't Nov 4 2003 shortly after Sept 1 2003?

 

[Anonymous]

Subsequent to an investigation into the source of this case, the U.S. resumed imports of boneless boxed beef from animals less than 30 months of age on September 1, 2003.

On November 4, 2003 USDA published a proposed rule seeking to designate Canada as a 'minimal-risk' country for BSE and seeking to permit the importation of fed and feeder cattle less than 30 months of age, as well as beef products from animals of all ages under certain conditions.

2 MONTHS!!!

WHOOOOPDI DO!

GOSH I GUESS YOU REALLY SHOWED ME DIDN'T YOU TOMMY?????

That's about as close to "simultaneously" as you're going to get.

Tell us Tommy, when did R-CULT start their legal proceedings to stop Canadian live cattle imports??????

Tell us Tommy, how long after R-CULT filed their injunction did the Canadian border stay closed?????

TELL US TOMMY!!!!!!

Let's see how long this dog hunts.


You're getting as slimy as the rest of the R-CULTers!

RK: "Thank you Tommy."

For what Randy? Supporting an organization that kept you from your historic markets and gave Canadian packers the leverage to drop your prices or for supporting an oranization that said that your beef was "tainted" or "contaminated"???

Thanks for what Randy?

Wait until Tommy answers my questions before you pop your champagne corks.

OT: "I'd lost faith with any cattle organizations that would represent ranchers as supporting the fraud against consumers by passing off imported beef as a US product-"

Nobody is passing imported beef off as U.S. product. "USDA INSPECTED" has never meant "U.S. BEEF" and 95% of the beef at the retail beef level is "U.S. BEEF". Another of your many phony arguments.

OT: "About a year of watching your "no facts, I'm always right BS"....."

Bullsh*t! You support R-CULT because you are blamer. Nobody has presented more facts on this site regarding marketing issues than Agman and I and nobody has been refuted less. You R-CULTers are such cheap talkers. You always talk about my being wrong but you never prove it. Just a bunch of followers following other followers because you need someone or something to blame. Facts and truth mean nothing to you.

OT: "As one local former NCBA member ( who is now an R-CALF member) who used to post before the forum changed asked me the other day- "Is that radical nut NCBA guy from South Dakota still on there?""

More cheap talk! Didn't see him refute anything I stated with facts to the contrary either did you?

OT: "SH.. In Montana a SIGNED AFFIDAVIT is used to prove ownership even with brand inspection-- Affidavits like bill of sales or Certification of being home raised on "no brands"- they are affidavits... And these affidavits are double checked and spot audited along with the accompanying brand inspection...... "

So why the need for Branding at all if a "signed affidavit" is all that is needed to prove ownership?

Answer the question OT!

OT: "Are all IRS filings audited?"

No, but why fill out the forms and why the need for audits if the signature at the bottom is all that is required? Why not just send the IRS a check and sign your name to an affidavit stating that this is what you owe?

Answer the question OT!

Sandbag: "If SH has "proof of the clear question", why can't he provide it? It's worth $100 to his favorite charity - what's holding him up? He keeps claiming his "original statement" was correct - didn't I propose that he couldn't prove it, either? I'm calling his bluff again, because he is bluffing. He's so full of crap, I have to close up the house when we get a North wind."

So why not accept my terms cheap talker?

Why are you running scared and talking smack again?

Sandbag: "Why am I the bad guy? SH is continually demanding others back their statements - he tries to bully and belittle people by calling them names such as "factually void" and makes childish comments like "Talk is cheap, and none is cheaper than yours", but when the same is asked of him, he refuses to back his statements and demands to be proven wrong? That's one hell of a double standard, MRJ - but you chastise me?"

You never back your positions, EVER! In contrast, I backed my position. I provided the proof. I even called the Tyson headquarters to confirm this information. The response I got was that Tyson's Boise and Pasco plants lost "WAY MORE" than Lakeside made while the Canadian border was closed. You can't accept that.

You said when someone from Cody, NE calls someone a liar they better be able to back it. You are from Cody, NE and you called me a liar. DID YOU BACK IT??? Hell no! Becasue you are nothign more than a cheap talking parasite who proves nothing but wants others to prove everything.

Typical of most R-CULTers.

Sandbag: "Can you back your statement or not, SH? It looks to me like you are factually void. I say you're just spewing cheap talk. I don't don't think you know what you're talking about.

If you THINK you are right but don't know, qualify your statement as an opinion. If you KNOW you are right, provide the proof you continually demand of others."

I backed my statement. I provided proof. Agman's data supported my position on the entire period of time when the border was closed and you thanked Agman for his honesty. Now you're backpeddling again. You won't accept what I provided yet you refuse to accept my terms for you to prove that I lied. That just proves what a phony you really are. Typical R-CULTer. All talk and no facts! CHEAP TALK!


~SH~

 

[Sandhusker]

SH, "You said when someone from Cody, NE calls someone a liar they better be able to back it. You are from Cody, NE and you called me a liar. DID YOU BACK IT??? Hell no! Becasue you are nothign more than a cheap talking parasite who proves nothing but wants others to prove everything."

I backed it. Ibacked it several times and even started a new post so you could reference the proof easily. I presented the FACT that you can't know what you claim you know because that information is not available. You could of made the opposite statement and that couldn't be proven either. Yet, you keep those lips flapping - truth be damned.

You provided no proof of actual profits. You threw out everything but in an attempt to confuse the issue - we heard of chain speeds, financials for the entire company, slaughter figures, but nothing that offered a scintilla of proof - no dollar figures for ANY OF THE PLANTS FOR ANY TIME PERIOD.

I'll bet you can't do it per "my original statement" that you lean on. I say to you and all on this board that you're full of crap. I say you're just full of cheap talk and no facts and thus a hypocrite. I'm poking you in the chest right now and telling you that you can't back your statements like you demand of others. The truth is not in you. I'm calling you out to put up or shut up.

 

[Anonymous]

Since you will not accept the proof that I provided, where is your proof to the contrary?

Where is your proof that I lied?

It doesn't exist because you are nothing more than a cheap talking parasite that wants others to do your work for you.


~SH~

 

[Sandhusker]

Since you will not accept the proof that I provided, where is your proof to the contrary?

Where is your proof that I lied?

It doesn't exist because you are nothing more than a cheap talking parasite that wants others to do your work for you.


~SH~

HOW MANY $&*#@ING TIMES DO I HAVE TO POST IT, SH? HOW MANY TIMES? CAN YOU READ? "PROOF FOR SH...AGAIN" IS THE POST THAT EXPLAINS IT FOR YOU. I KNOW YOU'VE READ IT - WHY CAN'T YOU UNDERSTAND IT?

 

[Anonymous]

You didn't prove sh*t you parasite! Your proof was that you didn't accept my proof. You never brought anything to the table to support your claim that I lied. You wanted me to prove that I didn't lie and still do. In fact you thanked Agman for his honesty when he agreed with me. You are a total phony, just like Conman. All you can do is spin, divert, and create "illusions" to avoid backing your position.

I ALREADY PROVED IT, I ALREADY PROVED IT, ......bullsh*t! You never proved nothing!

The bet is on the table and you chose to leave it because you knew you couldn't prove that I lied. More cheap talk! You're nothing more than a parasite.


~SH~

 

[Sandhusker]

You didn't prove sh*t you parasite! Your proof was that you didn't accept my proof. You never brought anything to the table to support your claim that I lied. You wanted me to prove that I didn't lie and still do. In fact you thanked Agman for his honesty when he agreed with me. You are a total phony, just like Conman. All you can do is spin, divert, and create "illusions" to avoid backing your position.

I ALREADY PROVED IT, I ALREADY PROVED IT, ......bullsh*t! You never proved nothing!

The bet is on the table and you chose to leave it because you knew you couldn't prove that I lied. More cheap talk! You're nothing more than a parasite.


~SH~

I've already won the bet you've proposed! :lol: I refused it because your hypocracy torks me off and I take pleasure in exposing it for everybody else to witness. If you demand others prove their statements, you should do the same. You refuse - you would rather go on an anti-R-CALF tirade.

I hope folks weighing out the difference between R-CALF and NCBA take into account the character of R-CALF's most vocal opponent on this board - we can always use more members.

 

[Anonymous]

You didn't prove sh*t you parasite! Your proof was that you didn't accept my proof. You never brought anything to the table to support your claim that I lied. You wanted me to prove that I didn't lie and still do. In fact you thanked Agman for his honesty when he agreed with me. You are a total phony, just like Conman. All you can do is spin, divert, and create "illusions" to avoid backing your position.

I ALREADY PROVED IT, I ALREADY PROVED IT, ......bullsh*t! You never proved nothing!

The bet is on the table and you chose to leave it because you knew you couldn't prove that I lied. More cheap talk! You're nothing more than a parasite.


~SH~

I've already won the bet you've proposed! :lol: I refused it because your hypocracy torks me off and I take pleasure in exposing it for everybody else to witness. If you demand others prove their statements, you should do the same. You refuse - you would rather go on an anti-R-CALF tirade.

I hope folks weighing out the difference between R-CALF and NCBA take into account the character of R-CALF's most vocal opponent on this board - we can always use more members.

Way to go SH__-- ATTA BOY-- Keep up the good work :wink: :lol: :lol:

Now I'll be BWAMED as a SH__ cheerleader....... :lol: :lol:

 

[Anonymous]

Sandbag: "I've already won the bet you've proposed! I refused it because your hypocracy torks me off and I take pleasure in exposing it for everybody else to witness. If you demand others prove their statements, you should do the same. You refuse - you would rather go on an anti-R-CALF tirade."

BLAH BLAH BLAH!

You got nothing, that's why you refused the bet.

What was the proof that was offered regarding calendar year 2004 that you accepted as proof to win the $100?

Did someone provide you the proof that Tyson's Lakeside plant made more money IN CALENDAR YEAR 2004 than Tyson's Boise and Pasco plants lost?

WHAT WAS "THAT" PROOF SANDBAG?????

Answer the question Sandbag or keep dancing like the pathetic parasite you are.



~SH~

 

[Sandhusker]

Sandbag: "I've already won the bet you've proposed! I refused it because your hypocracy torks me off and I take pleasure in exposing it for everybody else to witness. If you demand others prove their statements, you should do the same. You refuse - you would rather go on an anti-R-CALF tirade."

BLAH BLAH BLAH!

You got nothing, that's why you refused the bet.

What was the proof that was offered regarding calendar year 2004 that you accepted as proof to win the $100?

Did someone provide you the proof that Tyson's Lakeside plant made more money IN CALENDAR YEAR 2004 than Tyson's Boise and Pasco plants lost?

WHAT WAS "THAT" PROOF SANDBAG?????

Answer the question Sandbag or keep dancing like the pathetic parasite you are.



~SH~

The proof that I accepted was your $100. If there was no proof, why did lose $100? :roll: Why are you questioning it now?

Why do you continue to divert from the fact that you can't prove your original statement, either? Why do you lie that you provided the proof when you didn't? Notice what happens when you lie - it just gets bigger and bigger.