OIE statement concerning R-Calf

[S.S.A.P.]

Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 10:58:56 +0200

Dear Ms. Delorme:

Thank you for your message to the OIE regarding your concerns on inaccurate statements in a recent release from R-Calf. We understand your concerns, and agree on the fact that often OIE standards are misinterpreted and/or misquoted. However, there is little we can do at the OIE to avoid such misuse of information.

We understand that officials of CFIA in Canada and those of USDA-APHIS in the United States are working on resolving current trade difficulties, as well as clarifying how the OIE standards, particularly on BSE, are being considered when establishing their own import regulations.

Sincerely,

Alex B. Thiermann
President, Terrestrial Animal Health Code

Now please reread the two paragraphs ......

Are you 100% positive that the majority of R-Calf statements and releases are not purposely misquoting the OIE to their advantage?

If you question or are undecided as to the validity of R-calf statements;
the OIE, as well as the USDA (and APHIS) and the CFIA offer official documentation of regulations, on-going measures and discussions. All of which define the scope of BSE surveillance and trade negotiations relative to both countries.

I would also like to thank Mr Thiermann for his response to my (and many others) concerns.

 

[Big Muddy rancher]

looks to me that he would be considered a world leading expert. Guess if he said it it must be right , don't you think reader the sec.

 

[Tam]

He is seconded to the World Animal Health
Organisation (OIE) as special assistant to the Director General, where he also
serves as President of the OIE's Terrestrial Animal Health Code Commission.
Prior to coming to Paris in 2001,
In 1997 and in 1998 he was twice elected as the Chairman of the World
Trade Organisation, Sanitary and Phytosanitary Committee (WTO-SPS).
Since 1994 he served as the elected Vice-President of the Code Commission
of the OIE. In 2000 he was elected, and in 2003 re-elected as President of
this important standard-setting committee.

Reader Who won't you discredit in the name of defending R-CALF lies.
You took a man with these qualification and knock him back to
"a representative and employee of the USDA", that would hardly likely to oppose the border being open. How far will you go to defend the lies of an organization that you say you don't even belong to. The rest of the world respects this man but you just see he is another USDA employee and not worth taking his word. :roll:

 

[Big Muddy rancher]

where the rest of the R-CALFers on this one /

 

[agman]

[

I did not say I did not respect him. How would I know whether to respect him or not? I just said you can take his statement with a grain of salt given that he is a USDA employee currently and that the USDA's policy towards Canada and BSE is to advocate the border being open.

It appears you are willing to question his credibility since he now works for the USDA and as such is implied as a parrot for USDA policy. Do you scrutinize R-Calf statements the same way regarding this issue. I am certain he is immensely more qualified per this subject than anyone in R-calf. At least he has the credentials;what does R-Calf have? By your judgement R-Calf's leadership should strike out on both accounts-lack of credentials and parroting the views of the organization they represent.

 

[Anonymous]

where the rest of the R-CALFers on this one /

When USDA got caught allowing packers to bring in banned beef it left the credibility of the entire agency in question! And as Judge Cebull said it appears they put trade politics above safety.......

 

[Silver]

where the rest of the R-CALFers on this one /

When USDA got caught allowing packers to bring in banned beef it left the credibility of the entire agency in question! And as Judge Cebull said it appears they put trade politics above safety.......

It seems to me that R-Calf puts trade policies ahead of safety.......

 

[Tam]

I did not say I did not respect him. How would I know whether to respect him or not?

I did not discredit him in terms of his credentials or knowledge.

I'm sorry but your statements about

"you can take his statement with a grain of salt given that he is a USDA employee currently"

and the statement about,

I simply said that as a LONGTIME and senior employee of USDA, he would hardly be likely to oppose their policies.

is an attempt to discredit the mans integrity and shows no respect at all. This is just like Dittmer you discredit him because he is a PR man but you have no proof he is not telling the truth. You are discrediting this man by saying you can take his word with a grain of salt as he is a USDA employee. You are the one that has no integrity or you would prove your statements about their lack of integrity with more than your oppinions of their current jobs.

And statements like

Think next time before you stab away at the keyboard.

Whoa, back off girl.

Open your eyes

are just plain rude and maybe you such think before you post.

The forum is so polarized and "along party lines" that none of you can fathom someone (gasp) thinking for themselves.

If we are so bad why do you waste so much time on us GIRL. :roll: :x

 

[agman]

[By the way, your statement is a bit incoherent. In what way does leadership "parrot the views of the organization they represent"? Leadership makes and communicates policy in most cases.

Think next time before you stab away at the keyboard. I simply said that as a LONGTIME and senior employee of USDA, he would hardly be likely to oppose their policies. What is wrong about that?

What policy does R-Calf's leadership represent? Their comments are their personal views and are parroted by their members.

By default your latter statement implies quite clearly as an employee of the USDA he likely cannot be trusted since he would likely support their policies. So before you pound the keyboard weigh more carefully what you post so as to get your intended meaning across.

 

[Sandhusker]

Can you say, "Conflict of Interest", children?

 

[Tam]

Tam and Agman - If you cannot understand why a senior employee of the USDA would not make public statements in opposition to their policies, then this discussion is pointless. Did you understand that he is chairing standards committee for OIE as a REPRESENTATIVE for the USDA?

Again, he may be the smartest man in the world. I haven't met him or heard him speak. However, my point (again) is that he is not a neutral third party with respect to the border and R-Calf, he is a USDA employee and as such, would be expected to support their policy.

WHAT PROOF DO YOU HAVE READER? What I understand is you are and have in the past questioned the integrity of a man that you have no proof is doing anything but telling the truth. When you can prove to us that he is not telling the truth about the meaning of the OIE then you come back and tell us but until then don't insult our intellegences or the integrity of this man with your OPINIONS. And I agree arguing with you is pointless because you think you are so much smarter than all the the rest of us. Just how long do you think he would stay President of the OIE if they got wind that he was issuing statements on their behalf that contradicted what the committee really meant to make the USDA look good. Maybe you should apply for his job and see if your integrity is questioned when you answer a question that is asked of you. I question your integrity every time you point out the integrity of others without any proof of wrong doing.

And Sandhusker prove conflict of interest or shut up. :x

 

[S.S.A.P.]

Can you say, "Conflict of Interest", children?

Sandhusker - who are you going to nominate to represent the United States Agricultural Industry to the OIE? Your wife's hairdresser or your barber ?

As he wrote and signed that letter from his position at OIE:
"we can do at the OIE" ... "President, Terrestrial Animal Health Code"
I expect he was representing the OIE standards. I'll check back and see if he has been given his pink slip !!

When I posted the letter I knew exactly who was going to deny (and discredit) this person and what he stated. With any luck someone out there read the letter and "took a second look" at the ways, means, and whats of r-calf. As a friend :wink: said: "R-CALF could care less about the damn truth but just maybe the words of the OIE could shed a little light in the eyes of those on the fence."

I hope a few readers can critically look at all sides of the issue with an open mind. BSE is a critical issue - to treat it, based on coffee shop talk and misleading, inaccurate information is doing yourself and our industry an unjust service. Have you ever repeated a story (rumour) and later found it not true .... ....?

 

[Sandhusker]

Geeeeeeeeeeeze. All reader did was point out who this fella works for - made no comments about credibility, didn't call him a liar, etc... and you folks jump on her?

Reader, now that you see first hand (again) how some of the anti R-CALF crew rationalizes simple comments, are you prone to give them much credibility on any comments they may make in the future?

 

[Tam]

Geeeeeeeeeeeze. All reader did was point out who this fella works for - made no comments about credibility, didn't call him a liar, etc... and you folks jump on her?

Reader, now that you see first hand (again) how some of the anti R-CALF crew rationalizes simple comments are you prone to give them much credibility on any comments they may make in the future?

What do you call statements like

"you can take his statement with a grain of salt given that he is a USDA employee currently"

and the statement about

I simply said that as a LONGTIME and senior employee of USDA, he would hardly be likely to oppose their policies.

if it doesn't question the mans credibility Sandhusker. And we all know if you are looking for credbility you are not going to find it in anyone that is defending R-CALF lies.

 

[Anonymous]

Geeeeeeeeeeeze. All reader did was point out who this fella works for - made no comments about credibility, didn't call him a liar, etc... and you folks jump on her?

Reader, now that you see first hand (again) how some of the anti R-CALF crew rationalizes simple comments are you prone to give them much credibility on any comments they may make in the future?

What do you call statements like

"you can take his statement with a grain of salt given that he is a USDA employee currently"

and the statement about

I simply said that as a LONGTIME and senior employee of USDA, he would hardly be likely to oppose their policies.

if it doesn't question the mans credibility Sandhusker. And we all know if you are looking for credbility you are not going to find it in anyone that is defending R-CALF lies.

Tam- How many times lately have you questioned the US's, the USDA's, and other USDA employees credibility saying they were covering up BSE cases and fraudulently changing the results? Now this USDA employee is subject to canonization.. ? :roll:

Now can you see why I think we need a trial? Too many unanswered questions on both sides of the border.....Let the experts get on the stand and explain the 20 month- 30 month inconsistency-- or the Taiwan, Egypt SRM's being removed while there is a different SRM standard for US consumers.... Or what new evidence Canadian ranchers who are suing the Canadian government claiming that the feed ban was never properly instituted or enforced might have to offer about the feed ban mystery--etc. etc.

 

[Mike]

Oldtimer - I noticed too that some will crawl in bed with ANYONE who says what they want to hear, whether they know anything about them or not.

I sure didn't take it that reader was scorning this guy. Just being a little hesitant about believing everything he said. In fact I thought posting his credentials was positive towards him. PMS clearly controls thought processes sometimes.

I'm like Sandhusker......GEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

 

[Big Muddy rancher]

Thank you for your message to the OIE regarding your concerns on inaccurate statements in a recent release from R-Calf. We understand your concerns, and agree on the fact that often OIE standards are misinterpreted and/or misquoted. However, there is little we can do at the OIE to avoid such misuse of information.


How come no one picked up on the fact that he said R-CALF is "MISQUOTING the FACTS"

Sandhusker has taught Reaader well Discredit, Deny, Divert. Decieve.

 

[Bill]

Geeeeeeeeeeeze. All reader did was point out who this fella works for - made no comments about credibility, didn't call him a liar, etc... and you folks jump on her?

Reader, now that you see first hand (again) how some of the anti R-CALF crew rationalizes simple comments are you prone to give them much credibility on any comments they may make in the future?

What do you call statements like

"you can take his statement with a grain of salt given that he is a USDA employee currently"

and the statement about

I simply said that as a LONGTIME and senior employee of USDA, he would hardly be likely to oppose their policies.

if it doesn't question the mans credibility Sandhusker. And we all know if you are looking for credbility you are not going to find it in anyone that is defending R-CALF lies.

Tam- How many times lately have you questioned the US's, the USDA's, and other USDA employees credibility saying they were covering up BSE cases and fraudulently changing the results? Now this USDA employee is subject to canonization.. ? :roll:

Now can you see why I think we need a trial? Too many unanswered questions on both sides of the border.....Let the experts get on the stand and explain the 20 month- 30 month inconsistency-- or the Taiwan, Egypt SRM's being removed while there is a different SRM standard for US consumers.... Or what new evidence Canadian ranchers who are suing the Canadian government claiming that the feed ban was never properly instituted or enforced might have to offer about the feed ban mystery--etc. etc.

I wouldn't exactly call what is needed a trial rather have a tribunal of independant people from different countries investigate what has and what should happen.

Whoops I forgot. The OIE investigation team already did that didn't they.

 

[Anonymous]

What do you call statements like and the statement about
if it doesn't question the mans credibility Sandhusker. And we all know if you are looking for credbility you are not going to find it in anyone that is defending R-CALF lies.

Tam- How many times lately have you questioned the US's, the USDA's, and other USDA employees credibility saying they were covering up BSE cases and fraudulently changing the results? Now this USDA employee is subject to canonization.. ? :roll:

Now can you see why I think we need a trial? Too many unanswered questions on both sides of the border.....Let the experts get on the stand and explain the 20 month- 30 month inconsistency-- or the Taiwan, Egypt SRM's being removed while there is a different SRM standard for US consumers.... Or what new evidence Canadian ranchers who are suing the Canadian government claiming that the feed ban was never properly instituted or enforced might have to offer about the feed ban mystery--etc. etc.

I wouldn't exactly call what is needed a trial rather have a tribunal of independant people from different countries investigate what has and what should happen.

Whoops I forgot. The OIE investigation team already did that didn't they.

Most of those so-called independent people have conflicts of interest- be they political, monetary, whatever....Most of those scientists will not go against someone thats going to jerk their grant funding-- Just like the other thread going- Do you really think a USDA employee will go against his employers (USDA) wishes--Or the Japanese Ag employee will rule opposite the official policy of Japan....Judge has nothing to lose or gain--His job is for life and his decisions can be made on the facts without worry of repercussions....

 

[Tam]

Tam- How many times lately have you questioned the US's, the USDA's, and other USDA employees credibility saying they were covering up BSE cases and fraudulently changing the results? Now this USDA employee is subject to canonization.. ? :roll:

Now can you see why I think we need a trial? Too many unanswered questions on both sides of the border.....Let the experts get on the stand and explain the 20 month- 30 month inconsistency-- or the Taiwan, Egypt SRM's being removed while there is a different SRM standard for US consumers.... Or what new evidence Canadian ranchers who are suing the Canadian government claiming that the feed ban was never properly instituted or enforced might have to offer about the feed ban mystery--etc. etc.

I wouldn't exactly call what is needed a trial rather have a tribunal of independant people from different countries investigate what has and what should happen.

Whoops I forgot. The OIE investigation team already did that didn't they.

Most of those so-called independent people have conflicts of interest be they political, monetary, whatever Most of those scientists will not go against someone thats going to jerk their grant funding Just like the other thread going- Do you really think a USDA employee will go against his employers (USDA) wishes--Or the Japanese Ag employee will rule opposite the official policy of Japan....Judge has nothing to lose or gain--His job is for life and his decisions can be made on the facts without worry of repercussions....

This man was answering on behalf of the OIE not the USDA and like I asked before how long do you think he would have his position with the OIE if they caught him giving out misinformation about an issue that is as important to the whole world as BSE is. I would think the OIE would be holding their PRESIDENT accountable for any information he releases on their behalf unlike R-CALF and their membership.