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

NCBA - Not Apologizing

Mike

Well-known member
NCBA Cattle Editorial: Time to Take a Hard Line on Trade



“Trust, but verify” is a timeless bit of advice made famous by President Reagan in the early 1980s when he dealt with foreign governments in military negotiations. It also strikes me as being very appropriate in trade negotiations, especially after 2 1/2 years of arm-wrestling over the re-opening of key markets to U.S. beef.



Many were surprised when the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association joined the recent call for sanctions against Japan if it fails to re-open its market to U.S. beef, and when we supported legislation to halt the import of Japanese beef into the United States. “Why would you take this stance,” they asked, “just as Japan appears ready to resume trade?”



The answer is that at some point, we’ve simply done all that we can to assure the Japanese that our product is safe. Japan is an extremely valuable trading partner, and I truly believe that they will eventually restore trade in a manner that is fair and reliable. I even had the opportunity to meet Prime Minister Koizumi in person recently, and found him to be extremely sincere and engaging. But I’ll make no apologies for keeping the pressure on the Japanese government, right up until the day that we actually see the safest and best-tasting beef in the world back on Japanese dinner tables. We just can’t afford to take our eye off the ball, even if resumption of trade appears to be right around the corner.



While Japan stands out as the big prize among export markets, I feel much the same way about South Korea and China. South Korea was once our third-largest export market, and it has also engaged in numerous delays after promising to re-open to U.S. beef. China is a market in which we had only really scratched the surface. But with its enormous population and growing economy, it holds huge potential for the U.S. beef industry. While both countries appear to be on track to resume trade soon, it is clear that we still have much work left to do if our terms of trade are going to be fair and reliable.



China’s June 30 announcement that it has re-opened to U.S. beef fell far short of our expectations. It was a weak attempt by China to meet its promise to resume trade by the end of June, but the terms announced are far too restrictive. If China re-opens only to boneless beef from cattle up to 30 months of age, this market will reach only a small fraction of its full potential, and U.S. beef will fall beyond the reach of most Chinese consumers.



South Korea is also making this process far too difficult, as they not only want to exclude bone-in beef but also set tolerances for bone matter that are absolutely unattainable. While I agree that some modifications in our processing guidelines may be needed in order to satisfy our trading partners, these concessions must fall within reasonable limits. Agreeing to unscientific, unrealistic guidelines is simply a recipe for failure, and will almost certainly result in additional stoppages of trade.



NCBA is not asking any of these nations to compromise the safety of their citizens, or to look the other way on any science-based food safety guideline. But we must demand that they act in good faith and accept terms of trade that are based on sound, internationally established science. We’ve grown tired of all this political pandering, thinly disguised as food safety concerns. It’s time get our beef en route to the Far East – no more delays, no more excuses.



If sanctions and retaliation seem like a harsh approach, take a moment to consider how much the U.S. consumer is doing to buoy the economies of each of these countries. We imported over $243 billion in goods from China last year – six times the value of American goods that we exported to China. We also imported $138 billion from Japan and $44 billion from South Korea in 2005.



Whether these countries really make better products is a matter of individual opinion. But my point is that the marketplace – not the political arena - is where that debate is resolved. I firmly believe U.S. cattlemen raise the best and safest beef in the world. We also raise it more efficiently, so it offers excellent value to consumers around the world. All we are asking for is the chance to prove it.



Source: Mike John is a cattleman from Huntsville, Missouri, and president of the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
"The answer is that at some point, we’ve simply done all that we can to assure the Japanese that our product is safe."

Except the one thing they continually ask for - TESTING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :mad:
 

Mike

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
"The answer is that at some point, we’ve simply done all that we can to assure the Japanese that our product is safe."

Except the one thing they continually ask for - TESTING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :mad:

It seems like the Japs are doing more of what the politicians here should be doing..................................

LISTENING TO THEIR CONSTITUENTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 

Econ101

Well-known member
“Trust, but verify” is a timeless bit of advice made famous by President Reagan in the early 1980s when he dealt with foreign governments in military negotiations....

The answer is that at some point, we’ve simply done all that we can to assure the Japanese that our product is safe.

This is the beginning of the lie. To "trust" a government without verification (private testing for bse) is exactly what the NCBA/USDA stance has been. That is not a R. Reagan republican position. It is a twisted self interest position. John should be ashamed of not understanding the rhetoric he uses. It shows his ignorance. He goes on to say this:

But we must demand that they act in good faith and accept terms of trade that are based on sound, internationally established science. We’ve grown tired of all this political pandering, thinly disguised as food safety concerns. It’s time get our beef en route to the Far East – no more delays, no more excuses.

This man has no integrity. He is just an industry salesman selling a bad pitch with no credibility.

We probably could have had U.S. beef in Japan with Creekstone providing it. The USDA stopped it from happening probably because it would give Creekstone a comparative advantage in the business over the NCBA/USDA golden boys.

When is John going to start representing the cattlemen in the NCBA instead of just the packers?
 

mrj

Well-known member
Econ101 said:
“Trust, but verify” is a timeless bit of advice made famous by President Reagan in the early 1980s when he dealt with foreign governments in military negotiations....

The answer is that at some point, we’ve simply done all that we can to assure the Japanese that our product is safe.

This is the beginning of the lie. To "trust" a government without verification (private testing for bse) is exactly what the NCBA/USDA stance has been. That is not a R. Reagan republican position. It is a twisted self interest position. John should be ashamed of not understanding the rhetoric he uses. It shows his ignorance. He goes on to say this:

But we must demand that they act in good faith and accept terms of trade that are based on sound, internationally established science. We’ve grown tired of all this political pandering, thinly disguised as food safety concerns. It’s time get our beef en route to the Far East – no more delays, no more excuses.

This man has no integrity. He is just an industry salesman selling a bad pitch with no credibility.

We probably could have had U.S. beef in Japan with Creekstone providing it. The USDA stopped it from happening probably because it would give Creekstone a comparative advantage in the business over the NCBA/USDA golden boys.

When is John going to start representing the cattlemen in the NCBA instead of just the packers?


Econ, Have you contacted Mike John to ask him to explain or justify his words?

If you have not done that as a minimum, and you are not a 'con man', why would you print such a scurrilous attack publicy before you took up your 'beef' with Mr. John and gave him opportunity to defend himself?????

MRJ
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
MRJ, "Econ, Have you contacted Mike John to ask him to explain or justify his words? If you have not done that as a minimum, and you are not a 'con man', why would you print such a scurrilous attack publicy before you took up your 'beef' with Mr. John and gave him opportunity to defend himself????? "

Have you ever afforded Mr Bullard the same courtesy?
 

Econ101

Well-known member
MRJ said:
Econ101 said:
“Trust, but verify” is a timeless bit of advice made famous by President Reagan in the early 1980s when he dealt with foreign governments in military negotiations....

The answer is that at some point, we’ve simply done all that we can to assure the Japanese that our product is safe.

This is the beginning of the lie. To "trust" a government without verification (private testing for bse) is exactly what the NCBA/USDA stance has been. That is not a R. Reagan republican position. It is a twisted self interest position. John should be ashamed of not understanding the rhetoric he uses. It shows his ignorance. He goes on to say this:

But we must demand that they act in good faith and accept terms of trade that are based on sound, internationally established science. We’ve grown tired of all this political pandering, thinly disguised as food safety concerns. It’s time get our beef en route to the Far East – no more delays, no more excuses.

This man has no integrity. He is just an industry salesman selling a bad pitch with no credibility.

We probably could have had U.S. beef in Japan with Creekstone providing it. The USDA stopped it from happening probably because it would give Creekstone a comparative advantage in the business over the NCBA/USDA golden boys.

When is John going to start representing the cattlemen in the NCBA instead of just the packers?


Econ, Have you contacted Mike John to ask him to explain or justify his words?

If you have not done that as a minimum, and you are not a 'con man', why would you print such a scurrilous attack publicy before you took up your 'beef' with Mr. John and gave him opportunity to defend himself?????

MRJ

It was his article, MRJ. Why do I need to ask him about it? He printed it. Are you saying they are not his words?

You are the one who should be ashamed that such rubbish is put out by Johns, not me. But of course, that would require you to THINK.
 

fedup2

Well-known member
Kruse's thoughts:
[Last week, Ag Sec. Mike Johanns was hell bent to push through new rules allowing the importation of Canadian cattle over 30 months of age. This week, he's questioning this decision, saying the most recent Canadian BSE positive animal at only 50 months of age, "does raise questions." That's a change. Last week Ag Sec. Johanns was scoffing at anyone raising questions over U.S./Canadian BSE science. This animal was born 4 1/2 years after the U.S. and Canada put ruminant to ruminant feed bans in place. It shouldn't have BSE. Last week, the USDA knew everything there was to know about BSE. The Japanese were a bunch of dummies in USDA's opinion, refusing to adopt the USDA's sound science. Last week Ag Sec. Mike Johanns would have imported that BSE positive Canadian cow and told U.S. consumers there was no way it could have been infected. Last week Ag Sec. Mike Johanns would have told you that we have 110% confidence in the Canadian food/feed safety system.

This week, Ag Sec. Mike Johanns said, "We need a thorough understanding of all the circumstances involved in this case to assure our consumers that Canada's regulatory system is effectively providing the utmost protections to consumers and livestock." Last week, the USDA had that understanding or claimed to have. This week that complete understanding isn't so complete anymore. What a difference a week makes!]

********************

[DTN reported that members of the NCBA adopted a resolution Thursday that the U.S. military should require company's providing beef to U.S. troops to buy U.S. beef. I'm sorry, I don't understand. I do understand about wanting U.S. troops to have U.S. beef. What I don't understand, what confused me is the NCBA's concern. They are the same guys that don't care if Americans eat U.S. beef or even have the information via country of origin labeling to identify foreign product to make the decision as consumers to buy U.S. beef, yet they want to make it a requirement that U.S. troops in Iraq and elsewhere only eat U.S. beef?!

I've pointed out consistent hypocrisy in NCBA policy, but they never cease to stop "hypocriticizing." Somehow, because it's U.S. soldiers, they feel all patriotic that they should only have U.S. beef. Everybody else, however, can buy whatever origin of beef packers or purveyors sell them without any regard that it's U.S. beef. They stand with the USDA when South Korea asks specifically for U.S. beef, refusing to certify U.S. plants co-mingling foreign product and the USDA/AMI/NCBA says no to Korea; you can't have U.S. beef. You don't have the right to choose the origin of the product you are paying for. We're going to sell you Australian or Canadian or whatever is the fresh catch of the day and you have to buy it. But for our own troops, you guys only get the best, USDA Grade A Prime-Choice-Select U.S. origin beef.

Why any cattleman would want to pay money to belong to an organization that stupid is beyond me. I believe U.S. troops should absolutely have U.S. beef. I also believe U.S. consumers should have the means to identify U.S. beef. I believe South Korea should have U.S. beef. I believe Japan should be able to buy ID'd BSE tested U.S. beef. The NCBA only agrees with one out of 4 of these "I believes." That's not enough to get my membership. ]
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Why any cattleman would want to pay money to belong to an organization that stupid is beyond me. I believe U.S. troops should absolutely have U.S. beef. I also believe U.S. consumers should have the means to identify U.S. beef. I believe South Korea should have U.S. beef. I believe Japan should be able to buy ID'd BSE tested U.S. beef. The NCBA only agrees with one out of 4 of these "I believes." That's not enough to get my membership. ]
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
This week that complete understanding isn't so complete anymore. What a difference a week makes!

I wonder if having four consumer and health organizations meeting with him and questioning the USDA's BSE policy the day the 50 month old was announced may have had at least a little influence on Mr. Johanns...Couldn't have been better timing for them... :wink:

I've pointed out consistent hypocrisy in NCBA policy, but they never cease to stop "hypocriticizing." Somehow, because it's U.S. soldiers, they feel all patriotic that they should only have U.S. beef. Everybody else, however, can buy whatever origin of beef packers or purveyors sell them without any regard that it's U.S. beef.

Glad someone else said this beside me- everytime I bring this up Maxine says I am a liar and have a perverted agenda or something to that effect :wink: :lol:

Gotta give NCBA an atta-boy for asking for COOL for the military- but what took them so long :???: They shouldn't even have to as that should have been an automatic contract stipulation with any government contractor long ago...And all our US consumers should have been/ would have been afforded that knowledge of what country their meat comes from long ago if some in the NCBA hadn't crawled into bed with the AMI/Packers in an unholy tryst......

"Don't tell them thar dumb folk what they're eating or whar it come from"- while they pimp for their partners...And then they try to tell people they represent the cattleman- as they run around spending my checkoff money advertising beef from everywhere in the world ... :wink: :lol: :lol:
 

mrj

Well-known member
Just a short comment........hypocrites are plentiful on this site!

NCBA members simply did not care for the current COOL which ONLY gives the IMPRESSION of additional safety measures for beef. Which ONLY affects about five percent of imported beef, that sold at retail. Which ONLY partially identifies IMPORTED beef, and does NOTHING to aid in tracing domestically raised beef in the event of a foodborne illness caused by that beef.

The rest of the lies in various posts will have to wait, but will not be forgotten. I have work to do.

MRJ
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
NCBA must not of liked the version of COOL that was much more extensive on what was to be labeled as they fought that, too.

Tell me, MRJ, did our country ban certain drugs (drugs that are currently being used in CAFTA countries) because of the IMPRESSION that they would be unhealthy for consumers? Good grief, it's been pointed out to you half a dozen times that these countries are using drugs that are deemed unsafe here, but yet you still refuse to recognize any compromise in safety. Why is that?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Country of Origin labeling doesn't have a damn thing to do with Source Verification. If the US troops want US BEEF, they can buy from any one of a number of SOURCE VERIFIED branded beef programs that can verify the source of the cattle unlike this brain dead unenforceable labeling law that exempts 75% of the imported beef and prohibits the means to enforce it BUT HEY, DON'T LET THE FACTS STAND IN THE WAY OF YOUR MINDLESS BANTOR ON "M"COOL.

I see some idiots are still claiming that the Japanese wants 100% testing while Japan mentions nothing about testing in their current negotiations, BUT HEY, DON'T LET THE FACTS STAND IN THE WAY OF YOUR MINDLESS 100% TESTING BANTOR.

"M"COOL doesn't have a damn thing to do with source verification, in fact, "M"COOL prohibited Mandatory ID. That's what you get when you have a bunch of followers repeating what everyone else says. NO COMPRENDE'!

How stupid is it to belong to a blamer's organization like R-CULT that has yet to win a court case and bases their opinions on "populist" blaming attitudes that cannot be supported by facts.

Highest cattle prices ever recorded with the Canadian border opened, 5 major packers controlling 90% of the market, and captive supply arrangements just as always.

When did this industry allow idiots who can't even understand cold hard facts become their spokesperson?


~SH~
 

fedup2

Well-known member
I see that you haven’t been around much lately SH. I haven’t either, but I also see you haven’t changed a bit.
You write: [If the US troops want US BEEF, they can buy from any one of a number of SOURCE VERIFIED branded beef programs that can verify the source of the cattle blah blah blah!]

That was one of the points in Kruse’s article, as it seems you missed it. Why can’t Korea buy source verified cattle from here? Why do they have to take what we damn well give them or nothing? Please, oh wise one, put the R-Calf stick away and deal with the issues! I heard and posted a story to one side, now I’d like to hear the other side. Not your usual whining, bitching, bad a$$ talk, just a few facts.

Why can’t Korea buy source verified cattle from the U.S.?
Why can’t Japan buy tested cattle from the U.S.

Your humble student awaiting your facts! fedup2
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Fedup the forum police: "I see that you haven’t been around much lately SH. I haven’t either, but I also see you haven’t changed a bit. blah blah blah"

I see you haven't changed a bit either. Obviously you're still under the false assumption that the world needs your hall monitor evaluation of the manner in which others post. Still playing referee.


Fedup the referee: "You write: [If the US troops want US BEEF, they can buy from any one of a number of SOURCE VERIFIED branded beef programs that can verify the source of the cattle blah blah blah!]

That was one of the points in Kruse’s article, as it seems you missed it. blah, blah, blah"

I never missed the point, I am simply addressing the wore out "M"COOL promotions that don't have a damn thing to do with source verification.


Fedup the hall monitor: "Why can’t Korea buy source verified cattle from here? Why do they have to take what we damn well give them or nothing? blah, blah blah!"

South Korea can buy source verified cattle. That's not their issue of contention. Can't you read?

South Korea is also making this process far too difficult, as they not only want to exclude bone-in beef but also set tolerances for bone matter that are absolutely unattainable.

Go ahead, I'll give you time to re-read it. Perhaps you might have someone explain it to you.


Fedup the Barney Fife: "Why can’t Japan buy tested cattle from the U.S. blah, blah, blah"

Japan isn't asking for tested beef, they are asking for age verification. If Japan was asking for tested beef, they wouldn't be importing untested beef from Canada WOULD THEY????

Besides, bse prions would not be revealed in the tests that have been approved anyway making the point moot. Think for yourself unstead of mindlessly repeating what you've heard.

Perhaps it's time to gather your little support group and evaluate the manner in which I post again huh??? ZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzz!


~SH~
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Scotty, " I see some idiots are still claiming that the Japanese wants 100% testing while Japan mentions nothing about testing in their current negotiations"

Maybe you could inform us exactly what Japan is talking about in their current negotiations? Maybe you could back up your talk with facts as you always demand.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
You are the one continually making the FALSE claim that Japan wants 100% testing. I don't have to look past the fact that Japan is importing untested beef from Canada to know how wrong your position is AGAIN.

Where's your proof that Japan wants 100% testing? Some quote from 2004? LOL!

Meanwhile, negotiations continue without anyone mentioning 100% testing besides the R-CALF followers.


~SH~
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
~SH~ said:
You are the one continually making the FALSE claim that Japan wants 100% testing. I don't have to look past the fact that Japan is importing untested beef from Canada to know how wrong your position is AGAIN.

Where's your proof that Japan wants 100% testing? Some quote from 2004? LOL!

Meanwhile, negotiations continue without anyone mentioning 100% testing besides the R-CALF followers.


~SH~

What, you couldn't back up your statement? Imagine that. You want to try to bring some facts again? What is Japan asking for in current negotiations. It only stands to reason that if you know what they aren't asking for, you should know what they are asking for. That is, of course, unless you're just flapping your lips with nothing behind it.
 

fedup2

Well-known member
Same ole SH! More blah blah blah! I never expected anything else. :roll:
I kind of like you SH, you remind me of myself when I was young and stupid! I don't know what your problem is, but I'll bet its hard to pronounce! :shock:
 
Top