Kenny Fox response to SH

[Anonymous]

Conman: "I think that tells it all. We don't have a democracy anymore with actions like this. If our elected officials can not correct this situation, they should be handed their pink slips.

It is no wonder Congress has such low polling numbers. They are not governing, they are helping themselves to the wealth this country generates. Iit is coming at the expense of our economy and the regular people with wacky justifications that cater to corporate donars.

These free trade agreements are part of the problem when you look deeper."

It does tell it all. It tells the fact that packer blaming conspiracy theorists that will lie at any cost so they have someone or something to blame for lower cattle prices cannot get their lies through the court system. That's what it tells.

If you think the solution to your "PERCEIVED" problems is to taint our legal system with conspiracy theorists and liars like you, you are sadly mistaken. Blamers like you are the problem, not any part of a solution.


~SH~

 

[Econ101]

Conman: "I think that tells it all. We don't have a democracy anymore with actions like this. If our elected officials can not correct this situation, they should be handed their pink slips.

It is no wonder Congress has such low polling numbers. They are not governing, they are helping themselves to the wealth this country generates. Iit is coming at the expense of our economy and the regular people with wacky justifications that cater to corporate donars.

These free trade agreements are part of the problem when you look deeper."

It does tell it all. It tells the fact that packer blaming conspiracy theorists that will lie at any cost so they have someone or something to blame for lower cattle prices cannot get their lies through the court system. That's what it tells.

If you think the solution to your "PERCEIVED" problems is to taint our legal system with conspiracy theorists and liars like you, you are sadly mistaken. Blamers like you are the problem, not any part of a solution.


~SH~

SH, why do you always have to resort to name calling?

The packers are in the middle between producers and the retailers. The use of market power will allow them to expand their margins at the expense of the producers as they have done in poultry. It is illegal undere the provisions of the Packers and Stockyards Act and the courts are not upholding the litteral intepretation of the law. Instead they have to twist it around and say that the Packers and Stockyards Act is meant to protect competition between packers on the retail end only.

What a joke.

If the justice system is not going to enforce the Packers and Stockyards Act for producers, why should we enforce any law when it comes the reactions that producers have against the frauds of corporations? Should we resort to a lawless society just because we have a corrupt system?

The Packers and Stockyards Act was written to prevent economic frauds from allowing those with market power to succeed in cheating the avg. producer. Do the packers not see that the laws that protect them are in jeapordy in the long run with this kind of strategy? Should we only enforce the laws that protect the rich and powerful?

 

[Anonymous]

Rather than wading through a ton of Sandman's spin and my responses, let me summarize Sandman's position here:

1. Sandman thinks that because 12 jurors believed that ibp dropping their price in the cash market to reflect their purchases in the formula market was proof of market manipulation and a PSA violation, that somehow trumps Judge Strom overruling the jury, the 11th circuit supporting his decision and the Supreme court refusing the hear the case.

2. Sandman claims that Japan wanted bse tested beef but refuses to acknowledge the fact that they have already accepted untested beef from the US then thinks the fact that they are not accepting beef from the United States is relevant to the fact that we are not testing. A statement claiming they want tested beef is more relevant to him than the fact that Japan has already accepted untested beef.

3. Sandman says "M"COOL is not what R-CALF wanted when Leo McDonnell stated that "M"COOL is a good law as written. I guess he speaks for R-CALF rather than Leo or Bullard. He thought that about R-CALF's position on "M"ID too until they voted on a resolution pertaining to "M"ID backing what I had said about R-CALF's position on "M"ID. They opposed it by a large margin.

4. Sandman supports allowing Creekstone to BSE test cattle under 24 months of age with a test that will not reveal BSE prions in cattle under 24 months of age. He thinks deceiving Japanese consumers is more important than creating BSE testing expectations in the United States by using deceptive BSE tests for Japan.

5. Sandman keeps alleging to market power abuse and market manipulation but refuses to present one stitch of evidence to support the allegation. Instead, he opts to create "THE ILLUSION OF PROOF" by suggesting that the Pickett plaintiffs proved market manipulation to 12 jurors.

6. Sandman keeps suggesting that R-CALF is not against trade and continues to try to smooth over the Canadians with cheap talk yet ignores the fact that R-CALF flied a dumping case against Canada that they lost and called their beef "HIGH RISK" and "CONTAMINATED" in a Washington Post add and court documents.

7. Sandman alleges that USDA has made false statements but presents no facts to prove their statements were false. Rather, he creates the "ILLUSION" that they are wrong with cheap talk.

8. Sandman thinks we are better off grinding up our chucks to blend with our surplus 50/50 trim rather than importing lean trimmings to blend with that trim.

9. He thinks BSE testing cattle under 24 months of age for Japan with tests that would not reveal bse prions in cattle under 24 months of age is not consumer deception but using CO2 to enhance red meat color through an aging practice is consumer deception after criticizing the packers for not aging.

10. On one hand he says we are losing billions by not bse testing for Japan with deceptive tests then contradicts that by criticising me for wanting to ship beef half way around the world rather than satisfy our own domestic markets. A classic R-CALF contradiction.

11. Sandman creates an "illusion of innocense" by requesting a name of an R-CALF supporter who bought supposedly "UNSAFE" Canadian cattle then claims the name is not proof that it occured. He also ignores Leo McDonnell's defense of the action.

12. He thinks low cattle prices after the checkoff was initiated is proof that that the checkoff hasn't done any good as if the checkoff was the only factor affecting cattle markets during that period of time which included the $8 hog era. Real brilliant guy!

13. He thinks Mike Callicrate never lied in Pickett even though Mike changed his story and the judge told the jury to disregard his testimony. He thinks the only proof that someone lied under oath is if they are brought up on perjury charges.

14. He thinks that taking $9.25 million dollars in equity from the packing industry should not affect cattle prices if the packing industry is competitive yet he can't explain why cattle prices move up and down with boxed beef prices if it's not competitive.

15. He thinks Mike Callicrate being a guest speaker at the SDSGA convention is justified by Steve Dittmer's appearance at the SDCA convention yet he refuses to prove Dittmer wrong on anything Dittmer has stated. In contrast, many of Mike's lies were proven to be lies in a court of law.

16. He thinks that the GAO report stating that GISPA was not doing their job is all the proof that is needed to prove that GIPSA was not doing their job. No proof! No examples! No details! No nothing! A statement that said what he wanted to hear was all that was required.

The list of spin and diversion goes on and on and on.

R-CALF's philosophy is to not let the facts ruin a good story.

Heck, hand Mike Callicrate the microphone and let him tell packer blamers how are markets are totally arbitrary and have nothing to do with supply and demand than in the same breath tell them how the feedlots are empty and don't have any cattle in them while blamers nod their heads to both statements never considering the direct contradiction.

The above deceptive positions from Sandman is exactly why I have such a low tolerance for him and guys like him. He has $100 to prove that I can admit it when I am wrong and ironically, that $100 came from my own research and my willingness to admit that I was wrong. He contributed absolutely nothing to the bet.

My prediction is that he will someday hold an office in R-CALF's organization because Sandman is just the spin doctor they need to keep the blaming train running down the tracks and divert from having to back your position with supporting evidence.


~SH~

 

[Anonymous]

Conman,

Someone who blames packers is a packer blamer by definition.

Someone who believes in conspiracy theories that have not been proven is a conspiracy theorist by definition.

If you don't like those descriptive terms, I don't care.

Someone like yourself that can hardly make a post without lying is a liar.


Want me to prove it?

Here goes....................

Conman: "Instead they have to twist it around and say that the Packers and Stockyards Act is meant to protect competition between packers on the retail end only."

1. Where did anyone twist the PSA around claiming that the Packers and Stockyards Act is meant to protect competition between packers and the retail end only?

That is a bold faced lie.

Prove me wrong Conman 101.

Second question:

2. Now that Pickett vs. ibp is done and past, what was the compelling evidence presented to the jurors that proved your allegation of market manipulation?


Watch the diversion on both questions folks................

Conman has never backed a position yet, he certainly won't start now. Why let the facts get in the way of a good story?

Conman: "Should we only enforce the laws that protect the rich and powerful?"

There's the "tell folks!

Punish Achievement, regulate prosperity, how dare you be successful.

Right out of the Liberal archives of John Kerry and Ted Kennedy.


~SH~

 

[Econ101]

Conman,

Someone who blames packers is a packer blamer by definition.

Someone who believes in conspiracy theories that have not been proven is a conspiracy theorist by definition.

If you don't like those descriptive terms, I don't care.

Someone like yourself that can hardly make a post without lying is a liar.


Want me to prove it?

Here goes....................

Conman: "Instead they have to twist it around and say that the Packers and Stockyards Act is meant to protect competition between packers on the retail end only."

1. Where did anyone twist the PSA around claiming that the Packers and Stockyards Act is meant to protect competition between packers and the retail end only?

That is a bold faced lie.

Prove me wrong Conman 101.

Second question:

2. Now that Pickett vs. ibp is done and past, what was the compelling evidence presented to the jurors that proved your allegation of market manipulation?


Watch the diversion on both questions folks................

Conman has never backed a position yet, he certainly won't start now. Why let the facts get in the way of a good story?

Conman: "Should we only enforce the laws that protect the rich and powerful?"

There's the "tell folks!

Punish Achievement, regulate prosperity, how dare you be successful.

Right out of the Liberal archives of John Kerry and Ted Kennedy.


~SH~

1. The London Case, which is the case in the 11th District that was used in the Appellate Decision on Pickett.

Have you read it? Do you know what you are talking about? If you did, you would have never written this response.

2. I have been asking Agman to get the court to release the transcripts from the trial so we could have a little peer review of the facts. IT HASN'T HAPPENED YET!!!!

Kind of funny you would ask me for the evidence in light of this.

 

[Sandhusker]

I rest my case, SH.

 

[Anonymous]

Conman: "1. The London Case, which is the case in the 11th District that was used in the Appellate Decision on Pickett."

Specifics Conman!

Everyone can see you're dancing around the question.

Here it is again..............

Give me the specifics of where the PSA was twisted around claiming that the Packers and Stockyards Act is meant to protect competition between packers and the retail end only from the London case used in Pickett?

You made the claim now back it up!

Watch the dance again folks, he never answers a question directly unless he's sure of the answer................

Conman: "2. I have been asking Agman to get the court to release the transcripts from the trial so we could have a little peer review of the facts. IT HASN'T HAPPENED YET!!!!"

So you know that Pickett proved market manipulation to the jurors but you don't know what that proof was so you have to ask Agman to release the transcripts when he doesn't have anything to do with the release of the transcripts.

You are such a wizard!



~SH~

 

[Econ101]

You should be able to do your own homework instead of trying to get everyone else to do it for you.

I happen to know the cases very well as well as their lawyers. Too much is obviously way over your head. You can find all of this information out with a little digging. I don't happen to want to lend you my shovel. Go get your own.

If you don't know what you are talking about, why don't you just SHUT UP!

 

[Anonymous]

What did I tell you?

ALL FOAM AND NO BEER!

Conman knows all about the cases after he claimed to not have read them and asked Agman for the court proceedings. He simply cannot post without lying. I don't care what the topic is. If he doesn't know the topic he just makes it up as he goes. A total fraud.


~SH~

 

[Sandhusker]

SH, "Rather than wading through a ton of Sandman's spin and my responses, let me summarize Sandman's position here:

1. Sandman thinks that because 12 jurors believed that ibp dropping their price in the cash market to reflect their purchases in the formula market was proof of market manipulation and a PSA violation, that somehow trumps Judge Strom overruling the jury, the 11th circuit supporting his decision and the Supreme court refusing the hear the case.

My reply; WRONG. Those are your reasonings for supporting the decision.

2. Sandman claims that Japan wanted bse tested beef but refuses to acknowledge the fact that they have already accepted untested beef from the US then thinks the fact that they are not accepting beef from the United States is relevant to the fact that we are not testing. A statement claiming they want tested beef is more relevant to him than the fact that Japan has already accepted untested beef.

My reply; I KNOW Japan was asking for tested beef. You - the self proclaimed defender of the truth, refuse to acknowledge that fact.

3. Sandman says "M"COOL is not what R-CALF wanted when Leo McDonnell stated that "M"COOL is a good law as written. I guess he speaks for R-CALF rather than Leo or Bullard. He thought that about R-CALF's position on "M"ID too until they voted on a resolution pertaining to "M"ID backing what I had said about R-CALF's position on "M"ID. They opposed it by a large margin.

My reply; This version is NOT what R-CALF wanted. Because he says it is a good law does not mean it was what he wanted. I've got a good heifer the other day, but I wanted a bull.

4. Sandman supports allowing Creekstone to BSE test cattle under 24 months of age with a test that will not reveal BSE prions in cattle under 24 months of age. He thinks deceiving Japanese consumers is more important than creating BSE testing expectations in the United States by using deceptive BSE tests for Japan.

My reply; WRONG. I think the notion of meeting a customer's direct request to be deception is totally absurd.

5. Sandman keeps alleging to market power abuse and market manipulation but refuses to present one stitch of evidence to support the allegation. Instead, he opts to create "THE ILLUSION OF PROOF" by suggesting that the Pickett plaintiffs proved market manipulation to 12 jurors.

My reply; 12 jurors voted unamiously. Judge Strom even made the comment that "proof was provided".

6. Sandman keeps suggesting that R-CALF is not against trade and continues to try to smooth over the Canadians with cheap talk yet ignores the fact that R-CALF flied a dumping case against Canada that they lost and called their beef "HIGH RISK" and "CONTAMINATED" in a Washington Post add and court documents.

My reply; Filing a dumping case does not mean you're anti-trade. The US Goverment has also filed anti-dumping cases - does that mean they are against trade as well?

7. Sandman alleges that USDA has made false statements but presents no facts to prove their statements were false. Rather, he creates the "ILLUSION" that they are wrong with cheap talk.

My reply; You know those statements were not correct, either. Who is providing an illusion here?

8. Sandman thinks we are better off grinding up our chucks to blend with our surplus 50/50 trim rather than importing lean trimmings to blend with that trim.

My reply; You finally made a correct statement.

9. He thinks BSE testing cattle under 24 months of age for Japan with tests that would not reveal bse prions in cattle under 24 months of age is not consumer deception but using CO2 to enhance red meat color through an aging practice is consumer deception after criticizing the packers for not aging.

My reply; I've said before, you can't deceive a customer when they are the ones making the request. CO2 packaging is NOT an aging process, it is designed to maintain the appearance of freshness. You know this, yet you make a misleading comment - that shows the strength of your arguement.

10. On one hand he says we are losing billions by not bse testing for Japan with deceptive tests then contradicts that by criticising me for wanting to ship beef half way around the world rather than satisfy our own domestic markets. A classic R-CALF contradiction.

My reply; I did not say it unwise to ship beef around the world. My point was that it made no sense to ship halfway around the world if you could ship next door.

11. Sandman creates an "illusion of innocense" by requesting a name of an R-CALF supporter who bought supposedly "UNSAFE" Canadian cattle then claims the name is not proof that it occured. He also ignores Leo McDonnell's defense of the action.

My reply; I simply asked for facts, not rumors.

12. He thinks low cattle prices after the checkoff was initiated is proof that that the checkoff hasn't done any good as if the checkoff was the only factor affecting cattle markets during that period of time which included the $8 hog era. Real brilliant guy!

Mr reply; Once again you put words in my mouth. I was simply pointing out that one could not point at the checkoff as being a great demand maker when demand actually decreased most of the time.

13. He thinks Mike Callicrate never lied in Pickett even though Mike changed his story and the judge told the jury to disregard his testimony. He thinks the only proof that someone lied under oath is if they are brought up on perjury charges.

Mr reply; Mike was never wrung up on purjury not accused of lying by anybody other than you. You claim innocent until proven guilty, but yet label Mike a lier and purjuror when he has not been proven either.

14. He thinks that taking $9.25 million dollars in equity from the packing industry should not affect cattle prices if the packing industry is competitive yet he can't explain why cattle prices move up and down with boxed beef prices if it's not competitive.

My reply; You keep telling us the market is competitive, but then offer excuses on why select packers can arbitrarily lower prices. A huge contradiction

15. He thinks Mike Callicrate being a guest speaker at the SDSGA convention is justified by Steve Dittmer's appearance at the SDCA convention yet he refuses to prove Dittmer wrong on anything Dittmer has stated. In contrast, many of Mike's lies were proven to be lies in a court of law.

My reply; I have posted Dittmer's inaccuracies here several times. SH knows this as he even replied to several of my posts.

16. He thinks that the GAO report stating that GISPA was not doing their job is all the proof that is needed to prove that GIPSA was not doing their job. No proof! No examples! No details! No nothing! A statement that said what he wanted to hear was all that was required.

My reply; Read the papers, SH. It's all there.

SH, "The list of spin and diversion goes on and on and on. R-CALF's philosophy is to not let the facts ruin a good story."

My reply; Talk about the pot calling the kettle black! :lol: :lol:

SH, "The above deceptive positions from Sandman is exactly why I have such a low tolerance for him and guys like him. He has $100 to prove that I can admit it when I am wrong and ironically, that $100 came from my own research and my willingness to admit that I was wrong. He contributed absolutely nothing to the bet."

I think folks can read our posts and make a decision for themselves who is being deceptive, ignoring the facts, spinning, etc....

SH, "My prediction is that he will someday hold an office in R-CALF's organization because Sandman is just the spin doctor they need to keep the blaming train running down the tracks and divert from having to back your position with supporting evidence."

My prediction is that you someday will have a nice place to live with soft padded walls and a cool canvas jacked with extra long sleeves to wear. :lol: Don't worry, I'll come visit you and stir you up from time to time.

 

[Anonymous]

I thought you rested your case?

Gotta spin some more huh?

Sandman: "My reply; WRONG. Those are your reasonings for supporting the decision."

So you are saying that you don't think ibp dropping their price in the cash market to reflect their purchases in the formula market is market manipulation?

If not, give me an example of what you believe constitutes this "so called" abuse of market power and market manipulation.

Bring it!

Sandman: "My reply; I KNOW Japan was asking for tested beef. You - the self proclaimed defender of the truth, refuse to acknowledge that fact."

You know that SOME in Japan claimed to want tested beef. Had Japan wanted tested beef THEY WOULD NOT HAVE RECEIVED UNTESTED BEEF.

Hello walls?

Sandman: "This version is NOT what R-CALF wanted."

If this is not the version of "M"COOL that you wanted, why are you still defending it?

Sandman: "My reply; WRONG. I think the notion of meeting a customer's direct request to be deception is totally absurd."

Those Japanese consumers who did want bse tested beef, did they think the tests that were being used would reveal bse prions if those prions were present? Did those Japanese consumers who wanted bse tested beef believe "BSE TESTED" meant "BSE FREE"???

You know damn well they did!

Sandman: "My reply; 12 jurors voted unamiously. Judge Strom even made the comment that "proof was provided"."

DIVERSION!

No proof is provided to prove market manipulation. Judge Strom's reference to "proof was provided" was proof that ibp lowered their prices, not proof of a PSA violation or market manipulation or he would not have ruled in favor of the defense. Quit being deceptive again.

Sandman: "My reply; Filing a dumping case does not mean you're anti-trade. The US Goverment has also filed anti-dumping cases - does that mean they are against trade as well?"

You fool nobody. R-CALF wants to stop Canadian imports, period. That is not even debateable.

Sandman: "My reply; You know those statements were not correct, either. Who is providing an illusion here?"

DIVERSION!

Sandman: "My reply; I've said before, you can't deceive a customer when they are the ones making the request. CO2 packaging is NOT an aging process, it is designed to maintain the appearance of freshness. You know this, yet you make a misleading comment - that shows the strength of your arguement."

CO2 is used to enhance the color THROUGH THE AGING PROCESS. You are the hypocite who criticized packers for not aging then criticize them for deceiving consumers by using CO2 to enhance the color through the aging process.

Sandman: "My reply; I did not say it unwise to ship beef around the world. My point was that it made no sense to ship halfway around the world if you could ship next door."

Then why are you bitching about BSE testing??? If you can sell that same beef for the same price next door WITHOUT TESTING, why are you bitching about losing millions by not shipping to Japan???

PICK AN ARGUMENT!

You're worse than a fish in a boat.

It makes no sense to ship next door if you can get a higher price halfway around the world.

Sandman: " My reply; I simply asked for facts, not rumors."

I provided the facts, not rumors.

Sandman: "I was simply pointing out that one could not point at the checkoff as being a great demand maker when demand actually decreased most of the time."

You can't measure the affects of the checkoff on demand unless you isolate all the other factors that were pulling the markets lower. Don't you know anything?

Sandman: "Mr reply; Mike was never wrung up on purjury not accused of lying by anybody other than you. You claim innocent until proven guilty, but yet label Mike a lier and purjuror when he has not been proven either."

He changed his story in Pickett vs. ibp. The judge instructed the jurors to disregard his testimony. YOU DON"T TELL JURORS TO DISREGARD A WITNESSES TESTIMONY IF HE'S TELLING THE TRUTH. He lied about ibp stepping out of the cash market for 8 weeks. He lied about ibp having contractual arrangements with the other packers. He lied about packers and retailers making "HUGE" $400 per head profits. He lied about cattle prices having nothing to do with supply and demand. He lied about about Tyson dismissing jurors because they were black. He lies continually and you defend him because he says what packer blamers like you want to hear.

Sandman: "My reply; You keep telling us the market is competitive, but then offer excuses on why select packers can arbitrarily lower prices. A huge contradiction"

There is no contradiction! The fines were levied equally to the 3 largest packers. If the fines were not levied equally to the 3 largest packers and if USPB did not have a high percentage of their cattle in a "captive supply" producer owned arrangement, it would not be a factor. There is no contradiction when the fines are leveled equally to the 3 major packers and National has most of their cattle tied up in a "captive supply" arrangment. Another empty tree for you to bark up.

Sandman: "My reply; I have posted Dittmer's inaccuracies here several times. SH knows this as he even replied to several of my posts."

DIVERSION!

Sandman: "My reply; Read the papers, SH. It's all there."

DIVERSION!




~SH~

 

[Sandhusker]

Geeeeze, this is getting old.

SH, "So you are saying that you don't think ibp dropping their price in the cash market to reflect their purchases in the formula market is market manipulation?"

I'm saying that IBP is not dropping their price simply because their needs are partly met via captive supply. You're putting words in my mouth


Quote:
Sandman: "My reply; I KNOW Japan was asking for tested beef. You - the self proclaimed defender of the truth, refuse to acknowledge that fact."


SH, "You know that SOME in Japan claimed to want tested beef."

No, I know that the Japanese Government wanted tested beef. I letter from Anne Veneman was provided to you that stated exactly that. You read it, yet you make the comments, "some in Japan"..

Quote:
Sandman: "This version is NOT what R-CALF wanted."


SH, "If this is not the version of "M"COOL that you wanted, why are you still defending it?"

Because it is better than the alternative of nothing.


Quote:
Sandman: "My reply; WRONG. I think the notion of meeting a customer's direct request to be deception is totally absurd."


SH, "Those Japanese consumers who did want bse tested beef, did they think the tests that were being used would reveal bse prions if those prions were present? Did those Japanese consumers who wanted bse tested beef believe "BSE TESTED" meant "BSE FREE"??? You know damn well they did!"

I don't know what the Japanese people believe about tested beef - neither do you.


Quote:
Sandman: "My reply; 12 jurors voted unamiously. Judge Strom even made the comment that "proof was provided"."


SH, "DIVERSION!"

Diversion? Diverting from what? Wasn't that the topic?

SH, "No proof is provided to prove market manipulation. Judge Strom's reference to "proof was provided" was proof that ibp lowered their prices, not proof of a PSA violation or market manipulation or he would not have ruled in favor of the defense. Quit being deceptive again. "

"proof that IBP lowered their prices"? That is totally incorrect and you dang well know it - and in the same sentence you accuse ME of being deceptive. Folks - here is a credibility statement for you.



Quote:
Sandman: "My reply; Filing a dumping case does not mean you're anti-trade. The US Goverment has also filed anti-dumping cases - does that mean they are against trade as well?"


SH, "You fool nobody. R-CALF wants to stop Canadian imports, period. That is not even debateable."

Now you divert. Does filing anti-dumping cases really mean you are anti-trade? You don't like examples that show how foolish you are, do you?


Quote:
Sandman: "My reply; You know those statements were not correct, either. Who is providing an illusion here?"


SH, "DIVERSION!"

I'm diverting again? Are those statements correct or not?


Quote:
Sandman: "My reply; I've said before, you can't deceive a customer when they are the ones making the request. CO2 packaging is NOT an aging process, it is designed to maintain the appearance of freshness. You know this, yet you make a misleading comment - that shows the strength of your arguement."


SH, "CO2 is used to enhance the color THROUGH THE AGING PROCESS. You are the hypocite who criticized packers for not aging then criticize them for deceiving consumers by using CO2 to enhance the color through the aging process."

CO2 is used not to age beef in the package, but to give the appearance of freshness. You know that. And you accuse me of spinning and deception.


Quote:
Sandman: "My reply; I did not say it unwise to ship beef around the world. My point was that it made no sense to ship halfway around the world if you could ship next door."


SH, "Then why are you bitching about BSE testing??? If you can sell that same beef for the same price next door WITHOUT TESTING, why are you bitching about losing millions by not shipping to Japan???"

Because we can not sell that same beef for the same price next door. You should think before trying to argue.


Quote:
Sandman: "I was simply pointing out that one could not point at the checkoff as being a great demand maker when demand actually decreased most of the time."


SH, "You can't measure the affects of the checkoff on demand unless you isolate all the other factors that were pulling the markets lower. Don't you know anything?"

I do know that - you're the one who presented the checkoff as increasing demand.


Quote:
Sandman: "Mr reply; Mike was never wrung up on purjury not accused of lying by anybody other than you. You claim innocent until proven guilty, but yet label Mike a lier and purjuror when he has not been proven either."


SH,"He changed his story in Pickett vs. ibp....."

Now you're diverting again. Was he proved a liar or not? Was he convicted of purjury or not? Both questions can be answered with a simple yes or no.

Quote:
Sandman: "My reply; You keep telling us the market is competitive, but then offer excuses on why select packers can arbitrarily lower prices. A huge contradiction"


SH, "There is no contradiction! The fines were levied equally to the 3 largest packers. ..."

You tell us there is adequate competition in the packing industry. You then tell us that because ONLY 3 packers are getting fined, the market will take a hit. What does that say about competition if the slight misfortune of only 3 players is going to take everything down?


Quote:
Sandman: "My reply; I have posted Dittmer's inaccuracies here several times. SH knows this as he even replied to several of my posts."


SH, "DIVERSION! "

Again I ask, Diverting from what? I'm staying on topic. I told the truth. You asked for proof and I reminded you that you have already seen it several times.


Quote:
Sandman: "My reply; Read the papers, SH. It's all there."


SH, "DIVERSION!"

I'm diverting again? I stayed on topic and told the truth. What else was I supposed to do?

 

[Econ101]

SH's lack of logic seems to be a perenial problem. Can't we just use this roundup procedure once to stop its growth? Who is feeding this weed to wisdom?

 

[Sandhusker]

SH's lack of logic seems to be a perenial problem. Can't we just use this roundup procedure once to stop its growth? Who is feeding this weed to wisdom?

For the life of me, I don't see how anybody can read his postings and allow him one shred of credibility. Every other post is a contradiction to a previous one, he puts words in other's mouths, ignores facts, demands proof that has already been presented to him, jumps to incredible conclusions that defy logic, accuses others of divertion and spinning when he virtually invented those practices here, and tops it all off with juvinile behavior.

I'm honest when I say I pity him and beleive he has issues.

 

[Anonymous]

Sandman: "For the life of me, I don't see how anybody can read his postings and allow him one shred of credibility. Every other post is a contradiction to a previous one, he puts words in other's mouths, ignores facts, demands proof that has already been presented to him, jumps to incredible conclusions that defy logic, accuses others of divertion and spinning when he virtually invented those practices here, and tops it all off with juvinile behavior."

You really are getting desperate aren't you?

Poor little Austin! Thinks everyone needs his spin on the truth. LOL!

Sandman: "I'm saying that IBP is not dropping their price simply because their needs are partly met via captive supply."

What was the Pickett case about if it was not about Tyson's use of captive supply cattle to leverage down the cash market?

Sandman: "You're putting words in my mouth"

I asked a question!

Sandman: "No, I know that the Japanese Government wanted tested beef. I letter from Anne Veneman was provided to you that stated exactly that. You read it, yet you make the comments, "some in Japan"."

If the Japanese government wanted bse tested beef, why did they agree to import untested beef from the U.S.?

Actions speak louder than words.

Sandman: "Because it is better than the alternative of nothing."

You know all the flaws this law contains yet you support it like the blind follower you are.

Sandman: " don't know what the Japanese people believe about tested beef - neither do you."

Hahaha!

As if the Japanese consumer would want bse tested beef knowing that bse prions will not be revealed in cattle under 24 months creating only an "ILLUSION" of safety???

I'll bet those consumers will rest easier knowing that bse prions would not be revealed in cattle under 24 months of age with the bse tests Creekstone planned to use.

You could save the costs of the bse test and just wave a magic wand over the beef. That would do just as much good.

Sandman: "Diversion? Diverting from what? Wasn't that the topic?"

Diverting from having to provide one stitch of evidence to support your market manipulation conspiracy theory.

You will continue to divert because you have no proof. Just a need to blame.

Sandman: ""proof that IBP lowered their prices"? That is totally incorrect and you dang well know it - and in the same sentence you accuse ME of being deceptive."

Prove it cheap talker. Bring the proof that Judge Strom stated that "proof was provided" of a PSA violation or market manipulation.

That's total bullsh*t! You have the chance to prove me wrong by bringing the statement but you won't. You'll continue to divert and create your "Illusions" of what Judge Strom meant. More cheap talk!

Do you honestly believe that Judge Strom would say "proof was provided" of a PSA violation THEN STATE IN HIS RULING THAT THERE WAS NO VIOLATION OF THE PSA???? How stupid can you be?

If you are going to challenge me, bring the damn proof? You won't because you talk the talk but you can't walk the walk.

Sandman: "Does filing anti-dumping cases really mean you are anti-trade?"

In R-CALF's case, yes!

Why do you try to deny the fact that R-CALF does not want Canadian imports? You can't dance around that fact but you'll certainly try.

Sandman: "I'm diverting again?"

Always! Bring the proof that USDA's statements are incorrect.

Watch the diversion dance folks!



You want to see Sandman spin a statement? Catch this!

Here's what I said:

SH (previous): "CO2 is used to enhance the color THROUGH THE AGING PROCESS"[/i]

Here's Sandman's spin....

Sandman: "CO2 is used not to age beef in the package, but to give the appearance of freshness."

I never said a damn thing about using CO2 to age beef, I said it was used to enhance the color through the aging process.

That's what a deceptive liar he is and he thinks his deceptiveness is so cute.


Now check this spin job out.......

Sandman (previous): "My reply; I did not say it unwise to ship beef around the world. My point was that it made no sense to ship halfway around the world if you could ship next door."

SH (in response), "Then why are you bitching about BSE testing??? If you can sell that same beef for the same price next door WITHOUT TESTING, why are you bitching about losing millions by not shipping to Japan???"

Here's his reponse.........

Sandman: "Because we can not sell that same beef for the same price next door. You should think before trying to argue."

He talks in circles.

What the hell is your point about not shipping abroad if you can ship next door IF WE CAN'T SELL THE SAME BEEF FOR THE SAME PRICE NEXT DOOR???

What a retard!

Sandman: "I do know that - you're the one who presented the checkoff as increasing demand."

I didn't say the checkoff was the only factor affecting demand. Quit twisting the truth.

Sandman: "Was he proved a liar or not?"

Yes he was! He changed his story so the Judge requested the jurors to disregard his testimony.

Sandman: "Was he convicted of purjury or not?"

He doesn't have to be convicted of perjury to have lied under oath. I'm not playing your spin game.

Sandman: "You tell us there is adequate competition in the packing industry. You then tell us that because ONLY 3 packers are getting fined, the market will take a hit. What does that say about competition if the slight misfortune of only 3 players is going to take everything down?"

The three largest packers are being fined equally. That means each of those packers has that much less equity to spend on cattle. Did you honestly think they were going to operate at a loss for your benefit?

Sandman: "Again I ask, Diverting from what? I'm staying on topic. I told the truth. You asked for proof and I reminded you that you have already seen it several times."

Bring the proof of Dittmer's inaccuracies and quit diverting!

Sandman: "I'm diverting again? I stayed on topic and told the truth. What else was I supposed to do?"

Bring the proof that GIPSA is not doing their job. Give me an example, NOT A STATEMENT! I want proof!

You have no proof so you slip and slide and slither like the weasel you are.


~SH~

 

[RobertMac]

For the life of me, I don't see how anybody can read his postings and allow him one shred of credibility. Every other post is a contradiction to a previous one, he puts words in other's mouths, ignores facts, demands proof that has already been presented to him, jumps to incredible conclusions that defy logic, accuses others of divertion and spinning when he virtually invented those practices here, and tops it all off with juvinile behavior.

Now look at yourself, you done got all muddy again. :wink: :lol: :lol:

Our competition is poulty and pork, not Canadian imports.

Which of the five packers (that process over 90% of fed cattle) aren't also in the other protein sources? Competition????

 

[Sandhusker]

I'm muddy enough. Nothing else needs to be said, rational folks can read the exchanges and figure out there is no sense and no winning with SH. I don't know why I waste my time talking to a post here when I can go outside and have a whole audience of posts.

What a flipping idiot.....

 

[Anonymous]

Poor guy!

I can't say I blame you for running out now Austin.

You make all sorts of allegations about my posts but back none of it up with examples, you can't explain why ibp dropped their price in Pickett, you can't distinguish a question from a statement, you think a statement by Veneman (who you had nothing but disdain for previously) claiming that Japan wants BSE tested beef trumps the fact that we have already shipped them untested beef, you think a flawed labeling law is better than doing nothing (LOL!), you can't admit to yourself that the Japanese consumer believes "BSE TESTED" means "BSE FREE" cause they sure as hell didn't want bse testing if it wouldn't assure food safety, you can't provide one hint of evidence to support your "market manipulation" conspiracy theory, you can't accept the fact that you lost Pickett all the way to the Supreme Court level, you can't explain Strom's "proof was provided statement" against the fact that he said there was no evidence of a PSA violation in his ruling, you want to claim R-CALF is for trade when they are adamantly opposed to Canadian imports and opposed CAFTA when those countries weren't meeting their quotas and it meant the US didn't have to pay tarriffs as high as 40% to export, you refuse to back your position that USDA's statements are incorrect, you think it's ok to deceive Japanese consumers but not enhance meat color during aging in the United States after bitching about the packers not aging beef, you contradict yourself on not shipping beef around the world when we could ship it next door when you have went on an on about the millions we lost by not shipping to Japan, you make allegations that I claimed the checkoff was solely responsible for demand after I have mentioned the Adkins diet how many times, you think a person has to be brought up on perjury charges to have lied under oath, you can't understand that if you take $9.25 million in equity away from the three largest packers equally there is $9.25 million less to pay for cattle equally, you claim Dittmer's statements are inaccurate but provide no proof of these inaccuracies (more cheap talk), and you sink your teeth into a GAO report with no details on how GIPSA is not doing their job.

All that and you call me a flippin' idiot! Hahaha!

Believe me, I can certainly understand your level of frustration. If I had to spin, divert, dance, contradict myself, and discredit just to defend a need to blame I'm sure I'd be just as frustrated.

That's ok Austin, I understand completely!

Sometimes it's just hard to accept the facts isn't it?



~SH~

 

[RobertMac]

If I had to spin, divert, dance, contradict myself, and discredit...

Looking in a mirror???? :wink: :lol: :lol:

 

[Sandhusker]

I have no problem addressing each of his BS statements and I'll be happy to do so of anybody thinks I haven't already or if it will do any good. I'm already muddy...