• 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's Flip - Flopping!

more interesting quotes from R-CALF press releases

"R-CALF USA believes the border should remain closed until the Canadians initiate higher safety standards and a more comprehensive testing regime to ensure public health.
Click to expand...

BILLINGS, MONT. (February 21, 2005) The Ranchers-Cattlemen's Action Legal Fund, United Stockgrowers of America (R-CALF USA) urged consumers today to tell their grocery store managers, butchers, mayors, governors, members of Congress and local health officials: "Keep U.S. Beef Safe!" This call-for-action is part of a nationwide campaign to stop federal officials from dropping crucial food safety protections for imported beef, specifically from Canada. Four cases of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE), a deadly disease also known as mad cow, have been identified in Canadian cattle since May 2003.
Click to expand...

Jan 11, 2004 "This means importing cattle and beef from Canada should not be considered any less hazardous than importing cattle and beef from many BSE-positive European countries, and these imports could possibly be more hazardous," Bullard continued. "Not only should USDA immediately withdraw its rule to resume cattle and beef trade with Canada, it should also immediately halt all imports of Canadian boneless beef from animals under 30 months of age, at least until it requires Canadian beef to be labeled so consumers can choose how much risk they want to assume when buying beef not tested for BSE from Canada, especially since Canada has recently – and formally – acknowledged several cases of BSE.
"There is a serious BSE problem in Canada and there has been no comparable problem in the United States," Bullard added
Click to expand...
But R-CALF USA [has] never argued that there was a great risk to human health from resumed imports of cattle and beef from Canada." :roll:
 
Sandhusker: "I brought up a number of outlandish comments he has made - yet nobody seemed to read those - didn't get one comment."

You brought up a number of comments he made that you "PERCEIVED TO BE" outlandish. Not once did you present facts to disprove what he stated. That would make your opinion of Dittmer basically worthless.

I have never been so disappointed in my fellow cattlement to see so many producers so naive about this industry that they would lie IN A COURT OF LAW about the safety of Canadian beef when Canada has taken more stringent precautionary measures than we have. Born from the ignorance of not understanding the impact of Canadian imports on our market and how Canada will eventually absorb that same portion of our export market. WOW, THAT WAS SURE WORTH STABBING THE CANADIAN PRODUCER IN THE BACK AND LOADING A BSE GUN THAT'S POINTED AT OUR HEADS WASN'T IT??? BRILLIANT!

The integrity of SOME U.S. cattlemen has found it's all time low with their support of R-CULT's lies about the safety of Canadian beef. I hope Canada sues the R-CULTers for every calf that was donated because R-CULT has jeoprodized the integrity of the U.S. beef supply with their stupid statements about Canadian beef.


~SH~
 
SH, "You brought up a number of comments he made that you "PERCEIVED TO BE" outlandish. Not once did you present facts to disprove what he stated. That would make your opinion of Dittmer basically worthless.

Dittmer, excuse me, the "foundation" stated that R-CALF supports only sustainable (organic) agriculture. If you are asking me to present facts refuting THAT, you have sunk to a new level of selective blindness and absurdity.
 
Sandhusker: "Dittmer, excuse me, the "foundation" stated that R-CALF supports only sustainable (organic) agriculture."

Could you please provide that quote for me WITHIN ORIGINAL CONTEXT?



~SH~
 
~SH~ said:
Sandhusker: "Dittmer, excuse me, the "foundation" stated that R-CALF supports only sustainable (organic) agriculture."

Could you please provide that quote for me WITHIN ORIGINAL CONTEXT?



~SH~
Click to expand...

It's on his website.
 
Sandhusker: "It's on his website."

Then it should be hard for you to copy/paste it should it?

The burden of proof is on you!



~SH~
 
~SH~ said:
Sandhusker: "It's on his website."

Then it should be hard for you to copy/paste it should it?

The burden of proof is on you!



~SH~
Click to expand...

"You always want someone else to do your work for you so you can see whether or not you can slime your way around it. " - Who do you think I can attribute that quote to? :wink: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Hint: It's the same person who said this, "If you don't even know what they are saying it proves that you are just a mindless follower." :lol: :lol:
 
reader (the Second) said:
Tam - you need to learn how to read. I told MRJ why I objected to Dittmer and

I told her that if she could find (which she claimed existed) false flag foundations against the beef industry, I would rant about them here too.

[reader, I did not say the groups against animal agriculture were "false flag" foundations! One is PETA, and many use the occasional opportunity to attack, but may have other things as their focus. Why do you think people in food production have no right to defend ourselves? IF, notice that is a big IF, Dittmer' foundation is not the best possible defense, this is an early attempt at defense of food producers. Given that fact, why are we not allowed "growing pains" ?]


Aren't you being a bit "friend of my enemy is my friend, regardless of tactics employed?" Aren't you able to broaden out intellectually beyond R-CALF or NOT R-CALF in terms of your view of all things in the world?

[What makes you think you know anything about my "view of all things in the world"? You do not know the history and time line of the formation of R-CALF. There are others than myself who understand the clever manipulation of ranchers that came before the formation of that organization which makes it quite obvious why and how it was formed. I would have no problem with that organization, had they never benefitted from the lies and attacks made on the Beef Checkoff and NCBA by some of the leaders and friends who raise funds for that organization.]

Just because he's against R-CALF doesn't automatically make him either your friend or 100% correct or effective or worth reading. As I mentioned, I ignore most advertising because I understand that it is not an unbiased presentation of even one person's view but a persuasive tool. This is how I see Dittmer, as a walking advertisement cloaked in the persona of a "foundation."

Ads can tell the truth but that is not their main intent. It is to persuade with images and words that cause you to have emotional feelings for or against. As I said before, Dittmer's use of language is very much in this vein.
Click to expand...

Yes, I realize you have called into question the quality, use, and strength of my brain in another post, however, even with the brain I have and the way I use it, I am aware that advertising is not always factual and is designed to "sell" a product or idea. We hicks out in the sticks who only follow cows around as they eat "free" grass, drink "free" water, and breathe "free" air till we sell them to continue being "barons" from the boonies are capable of understanding more than you may give us credit for.]

MRJ
MRJ
 
reader (the Second) said:
MRJ - I'm a small town girl, no way I was pulling the "hick" card. Those are your words. Yes, I appreciate analytical thinking -- which everyone on this site is more than able to participate in. This site is full of deep thinkings, regardless of whether their shoes have been in manure. I'm the last person to pull snob cards, watch that chip on your shoulder. You don't know me either.

Also I'm surprised that you cannot recognize Dittmer's style for what it is. Not to mention the merit of the arguments given by several here -- if it's an agribusiness freedom foundation why is it (Dittmer) focused on one topic, namely R-CALF? You remind me of the Dems and Republicans - it's not about the position, it's about the "party". I like to be a more independent judge. I rejected affiliation with R-CALF several times over the past year. I questioned their position vis a vis Canada as overly stated and hiding their real motivations. I listen to all of you, down to those who reject 99% of scientific findings. First, regardless of what I say when I'm annoyed, everyone is owed respect (well nearly everyone) and second, the vast majority of you have interesting views and it is worth learning from them, even if I end up disagreeing.
Click to expand...

You say Dittmer is a one topic man and even though you say you are not a R-CALF supporter tell me why that is wrong R-CALF claims to be a beef organization but said on the RFDTV program that they organized them selves not for all Beef issues but because of what they say was unfair Trade between the US, Canada and Mexico but that doesn't seem to bother you. There are alot of issues that the Beef industry need to work on but they in there own words were created to look at the litigation ways that could be used to stop what they thought was unfair trade. Hence the name Ranchers and Cattlemen action LEGAL FUND United Stockgrower Assoc. But they claim they are the fastest growing BEEF ORGANIZATION in the U.S.A. What they should really be saying is the fastest growing LEGAL organization that just happens to be made up of Ranchers and cattlemen. :roll:
 
Damn Reader you need to learn how to read.

You said
if it's an agribusiness freedom foundation why is it (Dittmer) focused on one topic, namely R-CALF? .
Click to expand...

first line of my post You say Dittmer is a one topic man and even though you say you are not a R-CALF supporter tell me why that is wrong?

I used R-CALF only to prove that other organizations claim they are one thing but they are only there for one purpose. The beef industry has lots of issue but R-CALF only concerns themself one that they can litigate like trade. This is what they said on TV the other night, they were organized to do so don't get after me for saying it. . Dittmer is a agribusiness freedom foundation and right now his main concern is proving what R-CALF has to say about the Beef industry is based on half truths and out and out lies. What is wrong with that and please put your hate for PR people aside and answer the question. Did he use lies to prove his point about R-CALF? and if he did please show us where you can contradict him as you never did the last time we had this debate.
 
Dittmer alleges R-calf said:

"U.S. beef is not safe and continually puts consumers at risk."

If they did say it R-Calf is not too smart. If they didn't, Dittmer IS a liar.

I would truly like to know.
 
Still nobody can refute anything that Dittmer has stated.

As always, those who cannot debate, discredit (rancher and reader).


Mike: "Dittmer alleges R-calf said:

"U.S. beef is not safe and continually puts consumers at risk."


I haven't seen that exact quote but why wouldn't they say it considering their following quotes.............

R-CULT said "USDA does not care about food safety"

R-CULT said "The large processers do not care about food safety, they only care about the money".


If USDA and the large processers do not care about food safety, that is the same as saying "U.S. beef is not safe and continually puts consumers at risk".


Besides, this is a moot point anyway because R-CULT never stands behind anything they say. Now they are back peddling on their position on questioning the safety of Canadian beef. They are backpeddling on their position of a mandatory ID system.

One day "USDA and the large processors do not care about food safety" and the next day, "we have the safest beef in the world".

How much credit can you give to anything R-CULT or their clones say when it contradicts what they said yesterday?



~SH~
 
SH, "Still nobody can refute anything that Dittmer has stated."

I have. Guess you forgot that.


SH, "Now they are back peddling on their position on questioning the safety of Canadian beef."

Why don't you find those quotes and actually prove your bad-mouthing for a change?
 
SH (previous): "Still nobody can refute anything that Dittmer has stated."

Sandhusker: "I have. Guess you forgot that."

WHERE DID YOU REFUTE ANYTHING PRESENTED BY DITTMER besides in your dreams???

All you did is make some passing reference to "organic farming" without ever providing the quote.

EMPTY HANDED AGAIN!!!!


Watch this, the response will be, "it's in the previous posts" as if Sandhusker's refute actually existed.

Sandhusker creates the "ILLUSION" that a refute EXISTED like the deceptive R-CULTer he is.


Sandhusker: "Why don't you find those quotes and actually prove your bad-mouthing for a change?"

R-CULT is now stating they never said Canadian beef was a "GREAT" risk to consumers. Being the "master illusionist" you are, you even questioned that quote until someone presented it for you from R-CULT's own website.

The word "GREAT" is important because it allows R-CULT to slither and slime their way around their previous position in typical deceptive fashion.


R-CULT stated, "USDA DOES NOT CARE ABOUT FOOD SAFETY".

Then they said, "We have the safest beef in the world".

DIRECT CONTRADICTION SINCE USDA IS THE INSPECTION AGENCY FOR U.S. BEEF!


In the Washington Post R-CULT quotes the USDA's Inspector General as saying, "In response to industry pressure, USDA knowingly approved the imports of high-risk Canadian beef products in violation of it's own ban.

This statement was in response to R-CULT'S INJUNCTION, yet they let the Inspector General take the heat for making the "high risk" statement that solidifies their position WITHOUT MAKING THE STATEMENT THEMSELVES.

There is nothing more repulsive to me than this type of slithering, slime ball, deceptive tactics by R-CULT as the clones continue to throw money at it. Unbelievable!


First they file an injunction and take an add out in the Washington Post addressing the safety issues of Canadian beef and BSE, creating an illusion of Canadian beef being a safety risk, THEN TURN AROUND AND SAY THEY NEVER SAID CANADIAN BEEF WAS A "GREAT RISK"!

John Kerry has nothing on these pathetic deceptive people that call themselves cattle producers.


~SH~
 
SH, "The word "GREAT" is important because it allows R-CULT to slither and slime their way around their previous position in typical deceptive fashion. "

No, SH. The word "great" is important because Dittmer, excuse me, a staff writer of the foundations :roll: , put that entire statement with that word in quotes. The use of quotations signifies exact wording. To use quotations when the wording is not exact is either sloppy or intentionally misleading. Which is Dittmer, excuse me, the foundation :roll:, guilty of?

There's a huge difference between "high" and "great". You anti-R-CALF folks must not have much on them if you have to manufacture quotes.
 
Sandhusker: "You anti-R-CALF folks must not have much on them if you have to manufacture quotes."

Who said it was manufactured?

Like the deceptive R-CULT clone you are, you automatically assume the statement was never made simply because it's not what you want to believe and nobody here produced it for you.

Typical you!

If you want to believe it, the opposition is challenged to prove that it's not true.

If you don't want to believe it, the opposition is challenged to prove that it is true.

Nobody is more inadequate at backing their position than you are because your position is based on the oppositions ability to disprove what you want to believe or prove what you don't want to believe.

That pretty much defines desperate.


~SH~
 
SH,"Who said it was manufactured?

Until you can bring up the quote, I say it is manufactured. You've had a week to post it, where is it? I know very well that if you had it, you would post it. Could it be that it's simply not anywhere to be found?

SH, "Like the deceptive R-CULT clone you are, you automatically assume the statement was never made simply because it's not what you want to believe and nobody here produced it for you. Typical you! "

:) :) :roll: Now that statement is a laugher! I assume that statement was never made because I asked those who claim it was made to produce it, and it has yet to be presented. What other conclusion could be reached?
 

Latest posts

Back
Top