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

R -CALF quote on Canadians

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Guess I lied earlier, I thought Bullard said this, it was Leo; " “R-CALF’s legal battle is not against Canadian ranchers. They’re families just like yours and mine, who share the same love of the land and way of life.

Kaiser? Murgen?
 

HAY MAKER

Well-known member
You are wasteing your time sandhusker,they have heard this many times,you see its just alot easier to blame R CALF,than to accept the truth.............good luck
 

Murgen

Well-known member
Sandhusker, send this to the Canadian public, that is where RCALF is/was being judged by Canada.

Why do you think beef consumption went up in Canada, when the border was closed. Did those consumers just start liking beef more?

Or was it to show that they were not believing the Lies?
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Murgen said:
Sandhusker, send this to the Canadian public, that is where RCALF is/was being judged by Canada.

Why do you think beef consumption went up in Canada, when the border was closed. Did those consumers just start liking beef more?

Or was it to show that they were not believing the Lies?

I sincerely doubt the non-ranching Canadian public has heard of R-CALF. Even so, would it do any good? You've seen this, yet it didn't effect your judgement.
 

Murgen

Well-known member
That's because I am involved in the industry and I can see through their misrepresentations, can the buying public?
 

rkaiser

Well-known member
So what is in a statement Sandhusker. He could have added "they are simply cannon fodder".

Rcalf's rhetoric hurt the Canadian Producer Sandhusker, and helped prolong the Salmon run. And that is that.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandbag: "Guess I lied earlier, I thought Bullard said this, it was Leo; " “R-CALF’s legal battle is not against Canadian ranchers. They’re families just like yours and mine, who share the same love of the land and way of life."

Who cares what Leo or Bullard said Austin? What matters is the position that R-CALF took in court and in their Washington Post add. R-CALF's position was that Canadian beef is "HIGH RISK" and "CONTAMINATED" due to having BSE in their native herd. That was their position in court and that was their position in the Washington Post add. Nothing they "SAID" matters in contrast. Canadian beef and live cattle being "HIGH RISK" and "CONTAMINATED" was the position they committed themselves to.

Cheap statements like "R-CALF's legal battle is not against Canadian ranchers" yada yada, are just an insult to the intelligence of the Canadian producer. You can't smooth over a lie about Canadian beef and Canadian cattle being "HIGH RISK" and "CONTAMINATED" with lip service about R-CULT's position being "not against Canadian ranchers".

How dumb do you think these guys are Austin? This is so typical of your deceptive ways. This also proves what a "mindless follower" of the gospel according to R-CULT you are.

R-CULT, in their eternal ignorance, used BSE "fear mongering" as a convenient excuse to stop Canadian imports and risked the integrity of the safety of the US beef supply in the process. That is without question the dumbest political move I have ever seen in the cattle industry. That's exactly what you get when "EMOTIONAL BLAMERS" rules in the decision making.

Again, who cares what either McDonnell or Bullard "SAID", what matters is what they "DID".

No R-CALFer can defend the contradiction between Canadian beef being "HIGH RISK" and "CONTAMINATED" due to having BSE in their native herd then stating that "US BEEF IS THE SAFEST BEEF IN THE WORLD DUE TO THE PRECAUTIONARY MEASURES WE HAVE IN PLACE (BSE precautionary measures)" after we had BSE in our native herd. No R-CALF head nodder can explain to the public what the difference is between Canada's BSE precautionary measures and the US's BSE precautionary measures. It was all "cheap talk" and "ILLUSIONS" (something Sandbag can relate to) based on ignorance to stop Canadian imports.

R-CALF does not want Canadian live cattle imports, period. The typical R-CALF head nodder response is "GO FIND YOUR OWN MARKETS" because they can't see this industry past the back of a Canadian potload of cattle and they need someone or something to blame. They can't understand that banning Canadian cattle and beef means that much less will be exported. They're not that objective.

Bullard also said, "USDA doesn't care about food safety" then contradicted that by saying "we have the safest beef in the world due to our precautionary measures".

What R-CALF "SAYS" and 5 cents will buy you a cup of coffee at Wall Drug because tomorrow they'll be saying something else and the "head nodders" will be agreeing with that.

R-CALF's success depends on nobody reminding them today of what they said yesterday.


~SH~
 

rkaiser

Well-known member
You tell him Scotty - Rcalf did all that AND helped the USDA and the AMI prolong the Canadian Salmon run in the process. In fact they are still helping out the new Salmon run that has evolved in the cull cow trade with continued support for a closed border to OTM cattle. Tyson and Cargill are both killing captive cows in Canada and enjoying lucrative profits because of it.

Everyone has the opportunity to choose the science that best suits their financial bottom line except for the Canadian Cattle producer.

BUT the Canadian Cattle Producer IS NOT THE ENEMY. :lol: :lol:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
RK: "Rcalf did all that AND helped the USDA and the AMI prolong the Canadian Salmon run in the process."

You are as wrong about that today as you've always been.

USDA was sued by R-CULT to stop Canadian imports.
USDA was sued by AMI to allow Canadian cull cows.

You can't change the facts just because you want to believe that everyone is out to get the Canadian producer. R-CALF stands alone in prolonging this "so called" Salmon Run.

Your allegation that USDA and AMI were aligned on this issue is just flat wrong but don't let the facts get in the way of a good story Randy.



~SH~
 

rkaiser

Well-known member
Don't worry Scotty, I won't ever let your facts get in the way of the TRUTH.

How's the gopher biz Scotty? Had any rain in your neck of the woods? Brother in law down in Estevan Sask is having a hard time seeding due to excess rain.

Must be easier to trap those gophers. Don't need such a long garden hose to flush them out.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Randy: "Don't worry Scotty, I won't ever let your facts get in the way of the TRUTH."

Truth isn't defined by what Randy Kaiser wants to believe, truth is what can be supported by facts. Facts is something that blamers are always short on.

The truth is, AMI never wanted the border closed. That is the truth and that is why they filed suit against USDA. You don't want to believe the truth so you continue to perpetuate a lie like packer blamers always do.

"FACTS BE DAMNED"


Randy: "How's the gopher biz Scotty?"

I wouldn't know Randy. I haven't trapped a gopher since I was a kid.

Still spreading lies I see. Gee, imagine that?

Whatever you think helps your cause Randy.

"BWAME DA PACKAH"!!!!

Poor, poor little Randy Kaiser.


~SH~
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
rkaiser said:
You tell him Scotty - Rcalf did all that AND helped the USDA and the AMI prolong the Canadian Salmon run in the process. In fact they are still helping out the new Salmon run that has evolved in the cull cow trade with continued support for a closed border to OTM cattle. Tyson and Cargill are both killing captive cows in Canada and enjoying lucrative profits because of it.

Everyone has the opportunity to choose the science that best suits their financial bottom line except for the Canadian Cattle producer.

BUT the Canadian Cattle Producer IS NOT THE ENEMY. :lol: :lol:


So what are we supposed to do, Kaiser? The closed border policy that the USDA had was supposd to have been based on science. They came up with it after extensive research. That policy, in effect, said cattle and beef products from a BSE positive country were too risky for us to take and we weren't going to take any chances. That policy said that consumers and producers would be put at risk if we did anything else. That policy was used on 22 countries without any question. Suddenly, it was abandoned for #23. The only reason was the packer's pocketbooks. If the USDA's previous policy-making research was correct, US producers and consumers were being put to risk by taking your cattle and beef. Nobody has came out and said the USDA based that policy on bad information, and we know nothing more about the disease than we did before.

R-CALF was simply reminding the USDA of what they said. Somebody had to. Changing health policy for the economics of a chosen few is simply unacceptable. Either the previous policy was wrong because the facts that policy was based on have been challenged, or the facts remain and US consumers and producers are at risk. I haven't seen anybody challenenge the facts the previous policy was based on.

If challenging the USDA helped the packers, that was unintended. However, it had to be challenged. Changing the rules just for Canada after that rule had kicked in 22 previous times is pure crap.
 

rkaiser

Well-known member
You talk of changing the rules to benefit a few economically Sandhusker ---- but hat is exactly what happened. BSE and the closed border gave Cargill and Tyson and advantage that will never be duplicated in history.

Can't you see that. What they did not gain from the Canadian Salmon run, they gained from the advantage it gave them over their competitors in the the USA.

The USA and Canada are now equally (I hate to use the word) infected with BSE. Time for Rcalf to forget about health and safety issues as we are pr oven to be equal (AS WE HAVE BEEN ALL ALONG). It's time to push the export envelope Sandhusker. Start pumping the beef from Canada out the good old American ports like the good old days. Forget this fight over the border.

It is, and always has been garbage and only an advantage for Cargill and Tyson and the new player on the American scene. The Canadian packer Nilsen Bros. who showed us all how lucrative the Salmon run was for them by spending some of those excessive profits taking over one of Cargill and Tyson's victims. Don't worry though Scotty - Nillsens will sell out to Cargill as soon as the opportunity arrives.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
The salmon run didn't happen until we opened for beef, did it? My point is that the science saying we shouldn't take your beef had not and has not been refuted then and the border should of remained closed. If policy had not been changed, there would of been no salmon run. A true closed border would have stung them pretty good. That was the very reason the border was opened.

I don't think the US and Canada are equal on BSE. Statisticly, you have a much higher rate than we do, and half of your cases are post-ban. We haven't had a post-ban case. I think that is huge. Sure, one can argue the USDA is doing a crappy job of testing, and I would have to agree with you, but the only facts we have is known cases.
 

rkaiser

Well-known member
Back to the science that suits you Sandhusker. Whatever.

If you think for a moment that anyone could have stopped the boxed beef opening you are even more of a dreamer than I could imagine. You are correct in saying that the salmon run did not start before the border was opened to boxed beef, but I am saying that Rcalf had no hope in hell of stopping that. Good lord man. And yelling and screaming like Rcalf did after it was opened only helped their cause. Can't you see that.
 

RoperAB

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
Murgen said:
Sandhusker, send this to the Canadian public, that is where RCALF is/was being judged by Canada.

Why do you think beef consumption went up in Canada, when the border was closed. Did those consumers just start liking beef more?

Or was it to show that they were not believing the Lies?

I sincerely doubt the non-ranching Canadian public has heard of R-CALF. Even so, would it do any good? You've seen this, yet it didn't effect your judgement.

:lol: RCalf is famous in Alberta
Actually rcalf got so much press up here that im sure the average Joe public probable thinks rcalf represents all American producers.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
rkaiser said:
Back to the science that suits you Sandhusker. Whatever.

If you think for a moment that anyone could have stopped the boxed beef opening you are even more of a dreamer than I could imagine. You are correct in saying that the salmon run did not start before the border was opened to boxed beef, but I am saying that Rcalf had no hope in hell of stopping that. Good lord man. And yelling and screaming like Rcalf did after it was opened only helped their cause. Can't you see that.

I guess we were dreamers. We were dreaming that our own government had credibility and integrity. We found instead that money talks. We found out that "trade" is trump.

We dreamed that if we could argue the case in court, the facts would win. We found instead that we could not even have a day in court, that we are supposed to believe the government always knows best and we are to be quiet and let them do anything they choose to unchallenged. We found out the USDA can not be held accountable to the citizens of the US.

I'll ask you again, just what the heck are we supposed to do? Politely ask for some grease on the bat before it is rammed up our....?
 

Murgen

Well-known member
Maybe it was the message! And the manner it was delivered.

Or maybe a plan may have been beneficial, without jumping all over the place. Trade to food safety and back again.

the message that was received by countless Canadians (industry and producers) and the same in the US was that RCALF was against trade and that it did not have anything to do with Food safety.

The number that received that message are many times the size of RCALF, and mostly producers. So it's pretty hard to get them back on side now, just because RCALF says "the are fighting for the cattleman"

Hypocrites!
 

DiamondSCattleCo

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
We found out that "trade" is trump.

I think what many of us are saying is that trade is what's needed in order for the packer domination to stop.

Lets just sit back for a moment and look at what happened after the border closed. Many small packing plants in the US had to close their doors because they simply couldn't get enough product to remain open. Thats hurts both you and I in the long run. It certainly didn't hurt the big boys, at least not the ones operating north of the border. Heck, all of a sudden they had more supply than they knew what to do with, and they were able to make big dollars on the product they were buying (don't anyone, SH, bother to argue that. Fat price dropped in half and you won't convince a single soul that the packers weren't cleaning up when retail prices barely moved).

BSE also damaged demand in the US. In the long run, thats not going to mean a thing. It'll come back up to where it was, pre-BSE, in a few very short years. However, in the meantime, more small packers are closing, not because they don't have supply, but rather because retail prices can't support them.

Lets take a look at today. Tyson and Cargill don't care if the US's border ever opens to Japan. They can ship all they want through Canada (not much right now, but only because US demand is so high), Australia, and Mexico (someone may want to check the Mexican side out, don't know if they got closed down or not).

So the only people who are truly helped by the border closure are the packers. They are multi-national, and the only way to keep them completely in check is for producers from multiple nations to work together. Just one example: if Creekstone manages to force the USDA to allow them to do 100% BSE testing, then we have a crack at it in Canada. There are at least 5 or 6 other ways that we help one another, but it requires trade as a starting point.

Rod
 
Top