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

Pig Wrestling, part 5

Sandhusker

Well-known member
SH, " 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?


SH, diverting from the topic of what filing an anti-dumping case might mean "You fool nobody. R-CALF wants to stop Canadian imports, period. That is not even debateable."

My reply; "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?"


SH, "In R-CALF's case, yes! "

You see folks, SH has certain rules that only apply to R-CALF. R-CALF files an anti-dumping case and they are anti-trade. However, the same doesn't apply to anybody else.

Speaking of anti-trade, I pulled some press release headlines from R-CALF's website. Do these look like the releases from an outfit that is anti-trade?;
Korea FTA Could Provide Substantial Benefits to U.S. Cattle Producers
Cattle Producers Support Oman FTA in Testimony Before U.S. Senate Finance Committee
Trade Opportunities and Risks for 2006
Cattle Producers Urge Congress to Support Bahrain Free Trade Agreement

I get called a liar, deceiver, etc... on a near daily basis. I ask who is lying and deceiving?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
ok, R-CALF supports Canadian imports, my mistake. LOL!

You successfully convinced me with your illusions.

Never mind the dumping case against Canada, never mind the injunction against USDA to stop Canadian imports, never mind Leo's comments about the economic impact of Canadian imports, never mind R-CALF's position on CAFTA, never mind Bullard's statements regarding not needing an export market.

You have convinced me that R-CALF supports trade. LOL!

What an illusionist.


Chief,

Great pom pom waves. Can you jump any higher?


~SH~
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
You get on folks about making deductions using one input for cattle prices (even when you do the same with captive supply), and then you do exactly the same thing on the topic of trade and R-CALF? You're a hypocrite or an idiot, I'll let the board decide.

SH, there's more than one country to trade with than Canada. You could take off your socks and count on your finges and toes, and you still could not count them all.

Japan won't take our beef, are they anti-trade? The US government has a trade embargo against several nations, are they anti-trade? Why not apply your standards evenly instead of picking and choosing?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandbag,

It's crunch time!

Should we continue to import cattle from Canada, YES OR NO???

Simple question that gets right to the heart of the issue.

Will you answer or will you divert. Stay tuned readers.



~SH~
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
~SH~ said:
Sandbag,

It's crunch time!

Should we continue to import cattle from Canada, YES OR NO???

Simple question that gets right to the heart of the issue.

Will you answer or will you divert. Stay tuned readers.



~SH~

You're diverting off the topic. If you want to talk about one country, start a new thread and I'll be happy to participate. This is about whether or not R-CALF is anti-trade or not. I've clearly shown them in favor of trading with other countries.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
MORE DIVERSION!!!

Do you support Canadians being allowed to export cattle and boxed beef to the United States, YES OR NO???

Do you support Australians being allowed to export lean trimmings to the United States, YES OR NO???

Do you support New Zealand being allowed to export lean trimmings to the United Stated, YES OR NO???

Watch the circus chicken dance folks............

Answer the questions Sandbag!


~SH~
 

Econ101

Well-known member
~SH~ said:
MORE DIVERSION!!!

Do you support Canadians being allowed to export cattle and boxed beef to the United States, YES OR NO???

Do you support Australians being allowed to export lean trimmings to the United States, YES OR NO???

Do you support New Zealand being allowed to export lean trimmings to the United Stated, YES OR NO???

Watch the circus chicken dance folks............

Answer the questions Sandbag!


~SH~

Why allow the USDA to give international packers comparative advantages over domestic packers?

Do you support the U.S. shipping beef to Japan and allowing Creekstone to do what the customer asks as far as providing for the safety requirements of the Japanese people? The USDA has already laid a lot of producer and domestic packer money on the table while allowing the price to be depressed because they haven't allowed the free market to work.

Why should producers pay for USDA mistakes while allowing international packers to recieve the benefits of trade? It only hurts domestic packers and will reduce competition for producer's to sell to.

I would really like small packers to succeed too.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
~SH~ said:
MORE DIVERSION!!!

Do you support Canadians being allowed to export cattle and boxed beef to the United States, YES OR NO???

Do you support Australians being allowed to export lean trimmings to the United States, YES OR NO???

Do you support New Zealand being allowed to export lean trimmings to the United Stated, YES OR NO???

Watch the circus chicken dance folks............

Answer the questions Sandbag!


~SH~

I told you to start a new thread if you want to change the topic. This thread is on whether or not R-CALF is against trade.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandbag: "I told you to start a new thread if you want to change the topic. This thread is on whether or not R-CALF is against trade."

DIVERSION!

My questions related directly to whether or not R-CALF supports trade. Your diversion is your "tell" again.

You won't incriminate yourself by committing to a black and white questions regarding trade so you dance. Your answers would be too revealing. Typical R-CALF MO!


Conman: "Why allow the USDA to give international packers comparative advantages over domestic packers?"

Another empty statement/question!

So what are you saying Conman? That you do not support trading with Canada, Australia, and New Zealand?


Conman: "Do you support the U.S. shipping beef to Japan and allowing Creekstone to do what the customer asks as far as providing for the safety requirements of the Japanese people?"

Of course I support shipping beef to Japan but I do not support consumer fraud that capitalizes on consumer fears and consumer ignorance regarding a BSE test that will not reveal BSE prions in cattle under 24 months of age. BSE testing cattle under 24 months of age with a test that will not reveal BSE prions in cattle under 24 months of age is not providing for the safety requirements of the Japanese people WHICH IS WHY THEIR GOVERNMENT ALLOWED BEEF TO BE EXPORTED WITHOUT TESTING, it's consumer fraud!


Conman: "Why should producers pay for USDA mistakes while allowing international packers to recieve the benefits of trade? It only hurts domestic packers and will reduce competition for producer's to sell to."

Another empty statement!


~SH~
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Quote:
Sandbag: "I told you to start a new thread if you want to change the topic. This thread is on whether or not R-CALF is against trade."


SH, "DIVERSION! My questions related directly to whether or not R-CALF supports trade. Your diversion is your "tell" again."

You are the one trying to divert. Your questions are NOT related directly to R-CALF. They're not even related indirectly. They're related directly to me.

SH, "You won't incriminate yourself by committing to a black and white questions regarding trade so you dance. Your answers would be too revealing. Typical R-CALF MO! "

I'll tell you once again, SH, the topic is R-CALF and trade - not me and trade. I'd be more than happy to answer your questions if you start a new thread.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandbag: "Your questions are NOT related directly to R-CALF. They're not even related indirectly. They're related directly to me."

Well we can certainly fix that!

Does R-CALF support Canadians being allowed to export cattle and boxed beef to the United States, YES OR NO???

Does R-CALF support Australians being allowed to export lean trimmings to the United States, YES OR NO???

Does R-CALF support New Zealand being allowed to export lean trimmings to the United Stated, YES OR NO???

Watch the circus chicken dance now ..............


~SH~
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
~SH~ said:
Sandbag: "Your questions are NOT related directly to R-CALF. They're not even related indirectly. They're related directly to me."

Well we can certainly fix that!

Does R-CALF support Canadians being allowed to export cattle and boxed beef to the United States, YES OR NO???

Does R-CALF support Australians being allowed to export lean trimmings to the United States, YES OR NO???

Does R-CALF support New Zealand being allowed to export lean trimmings to the United Stated, YES OR NO???

Watch the circus chicken dance now ..............


~SH~

Canada; At this time, under the current conditions, NO.

Australia and New Zealand; R-CALF has made no official statement supporting nor condemning trade with these two countries. They have voiced concerns regarding the trade agreements with these countries, most notably Australia, but have never advocated ceasing trade.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
I'll take that as an "anti trade" position against Canada since our bse precautionary measures are identical and R-CALF has stated that we have the safest beef in the world due to our bse precautionary measures.


~SH~
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
~SH~ said:
I'll take that as an "anti trade" position against Canada since our bse precautionary measures are identical and R-CALF has stated that we have the safest beef in the world due to our bse precautionary measures.


~SH~

You've shown time and time again you'll take anything the way you want to take it, facts be damned.

As of now, we do have an anti-trade position against CANADA, not the whole world.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
If you admit that R-CALF has an "anti trade" position against Canada, then I obviously took R-CALF's position for the way it really is.

Why is R-CALF opposed to trading with Canada?


~SH~
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
SH, "If you admit that R-CALF has an "anti trade" position against Canada, then I obviously took R-CALF's position for the way it really is. "

Yeah, and you obviously took R-CALF to be anti-trade wrong. Their support of the Korean FTA alone puts water on that notion.

SH, "Why is R-CALF opposed to trading with Canada?"

Because, after consulting scientists and experts in the field, the USDA testified to Congress that a closed border with any BSE positive country was necessary to combat the problem. Our knowledge of the disease has not changed since that policy was implemented, there has been no evidence brought forward to suggest that policy was based on poor or incorrect information, so there should be no reason to change that policy.

That policy was not questioned when 22 countries in this world were discovered to be BSE positive. Only when #23 was uncovered, was there any problems. What a coincidence that #23 (Canada) just also happened to have a large US packer presence while none of the previous did.... R-CALF is against US producers being put a greater risk just so the large packers can make a buck. Call it a sell out by the USDA, blood money, whatever.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandbag: "Yeah, and you obviously took R-CALF to be anti-trade wrong. Their support of the Korean FTA alone puts water on that notion."

R-CALF kinda "VERBALLY" supports exports and "VERBALLY" opposes imports.

Who knows what their official position on trade is since Leo says we should be spending checkoff dollars to expand our export markets while Bullard is saying we would be better off without an export market.

Typical R-CALF!


Sandbag: "Because, after consulting scientists and experts in the field, the USDA testified to Congress that a closed border with any BSE positive country was necessary to combat the problem. Our knowledge of the disease has not changed since that policy was implemented, there has been no evidence brought forward to suggest that policy was based on poor or incorrect information, so there should be no reason to change that policy."

USDA did close the border until measures were taken to assure that it was safe to resume trade.

The bse precautionary measures that have been taken has changed since the policy was implemented. Those bse precautionary measures must be considered and were considered in arriving at a decision to reopen the border. That's why R-CALF lost their injunction against USDA.

Since the world often looks to the United States for guidance on such issues, the bse standards we apply to Canada could be the exact same standards another country could impose on us.

Should Japan abide by those same rules since we had BSE in our native herd? OH BUT THAT'S SOMEHOW DIFFERENT.

We cannot impose any restrictions against Canada that we would not be willing to live by ourselves. That is how you bring integrity into the issue.

R-CALF's position on Canada has nothing to do with BSE and has everything to do with stopping Canadian imports. R-CALF fools nobody. That presidence was established when they filed their phony dumping case that they lost. BSE was just a convenient excuse to stop Canadian imports.


Sandbag: "That policy was not questioned when 22 countries in this world were discovered to be BSE positive. Only when #23 was uncovered, was there any problems. What a coincidence that #23 (Canada) just also happened to have a large US packer presence while none of the previous did.... R-CALF is against US producers being put a greater risk just so the large packers can make a buck. Call it a sell out by the USDA, blood money, whatever."

The fact that the AMI filed a suit against USDA to allow the importation of beef from cattle over 30 months buries any packer bias you would like to create.

USDA realizes that we cannot hold any country to standards we are not willing to live by ourselves. Thank God they are in charge of such negotiations and not a shortsighted blaming organization like R-CALF.


When we had our first native born case of bse in the United States, R-CALF stated that our beef was safe due to the precautionary measure we have taken. Since they also said Canadian beef was "contaminated" and "high risk" when they had bse in their native herd, can you explain the difference between the precautionary bse precautionary measures in each country?

Let's see you dance around that because I would ask you the same question in public.


~SH~
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
SH, "The bse precautionary measures that have been taken has changed since the policy was implemented."

That is wrong. Name one precautionary measure that is known today that was not known in 1997.

SH, "Since the world often looks to the United States for guidance on such issues, the bse standards we apply to Canada could be the exact same standards another country could impose on us. "

Open your eyes, SH. Other countries are NOT imposing the same standard on as we are Canada. You don't have to guess, you don't have to speculate, you can choose to live in reality. It is obvious the rest of the world is NOT looking to us for guidance. Proof that I am right - Japan, Taiwan, Korea, Egypt - how many examples do I need to provide to you?

SH, "Should Japan abide by those same rules since we had BSE in our native herd? OH BUT THAT'S SOMEHOW DIFFERENT."

Japan should do whatever they feel is best for them. They are a soverign nation.

SH, "We cannot impose any restrictions against Canada that we would not be willing to live by ourselves. That is how you bring integrity into the issue."

We certainly can, other countries are doing it to us. Reality, SH, reality - give it a try.


Quote:
Sandbag: "That policy was not questioned when 22 countries in this world were discovered to be BSE positive. Only when #23 was uncovered, was there any problems. What a coincidence that #23 (Canada) just also happened to have a large US packer presence while none of the previous did.... R-CALF is against US producers being put a greater risk just so the large packers can make a buck. Call it a sell out by the USDA, blood money, whatever."


SH, "The fact that the AMI filed a suit against USDA to allow the importation of beef from cattle over 30 months buries any packer bias you would like to create."

Yeah, right, SH. Maybe you missed Johans saying he is committed to opening the border to cattle over 30 months?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
SH (previous): "The bse precautionary measures that have been taken has changed since the policy was implemented."

Sandbag's deceptive response: "That is wrong. Name one precautionary measure that is known today that was not known in 1997."

Another deceptive spin job by the "MASTER ILLUSIONIST"!

I was not talking about the NUMBER OF INDIVIDUAL PROCEDURES, I was talking about the LEVEL OF PROCEDURES.

The bse precuationary measures we knew about in 1997 were not being incorporated to the degree that they are today ("the bse precautionary measures that have been taken has changed").

I can't believe how deceptive you are. You knew what I meant but you had to spin it. You just think you're so cute don't you? This is such a fun little game to you isn't it? Little Sandcheska, "master illusionist"!


Sandbag: "Other countries are NOT imposing the same standard on as we are Canada. You don't have to guess, you don't have to speculate, you can choose to live in reality. It is obvious the rest of the world is NOT looking to us for guidance. Proof that I am right - Japan, Taiwan, Korea, Egypt - how many examples do I need to provide to you?"

If the rest of the world is not considering our position on BSE, WHY DID WE ACCESS THE JAPANESE MARKET WITHOUT TESTING WHEN YOU CLAIMED THE JAPANESE CONSUMERS WERE DEMANDING TESTING????

Another empty tree!


Sandbag: "Japan should do whatever they feel is best for them. They are a soverign nation."

How convenient!


Sandbag: "We certainly can, other countries are doing it to us."

Oh give me a damn break. You and the other R-CALF isolationist's concern for BSE goes as far as stopping Canadian imports. You fool nobody. You showed your cards when your leaders contradicted themselves on their position regarding having BSE in your native herd.


Sandbag: "Yeah, right, SH. Maybe you missed Johans saying he is committed to opening the border to cattle over 30 months?"

Maybe you missed the obvious fact that the Canadian border is closed to cattle over 30 months of age while opened to cattle under 30 months of age.

FACTS BE DAMNED, if someone says anything to support your bias, you sink your teeth into it like the deceiver you are.


~SH~
 
Top