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

S.D. ranchers join lawsuit over mad cow disease

Help Support Ranchers.net:

Well i called it but why they didn't wait longer to file ? I guess the thinking is get it over and waste the last of r-calfs finances on a futile last ditch attempt to keep the border closed.
SandH - That is what you asked for and RK answered it and now you are dismissing the answer as opinion. Maybe r-calf should have to prove and provide scientific evidence to support their claims made in that press release OT posted. After all essentially you are saying it is easy to make claims but you want them substanciated. Should r-calf not have to be held to the same standards as everyone else.
I really like the hypocracy of the r-calf press release. Some examples are that r-calf is concerned that canadian cattle will contaminate US cattle feed. So r-calf is admitting the US is not following the feedban rules it set to stop BSE. So if there is any BSE in the US right now which the USDA and R-CALF cannot disprove, it is spreading. So what is r-calf trying to say in the press release, they a liable if someone comes down with vCJD or they are complicit and liable for damages to the US economy when and not if the US finds another US positive.
As for blaming the canadian born washington cow for all the damage to the US beef industry maybe some should remind R-calf that there are 2 indeginous animals that could not be traced to canada and that is why the US beef industry is still having problems with exporting beef.
The accusation that there are way more animals in canada that have BSE and have not been found is totally unfounded and baseless propaganda. Prove it! Oh wait it can't be proven. As far as saying feedbans don't work if they are followed they do. And as far as cross-contamination - if SRMs are removed that eliminates that flaw. And saying that removing SRMs isn't sufficient as a safeguard is just inaccurate it is opinion.
So this is all stuff we have heard before, nothing new no scientific evidence to prove allegations. Oh yeah the science from the CDC is flawed it is based on the numbers of the animals found testing positive. Consider this - the chance of finding a atypical BSE positive animal in the USA is 100 times more likely than in canada. The US has found 2- one in texas and alabama and Canada found one in manitoba. Funny how bad you can make things look when you manipulate numbers.
 
Big Muddy rancher said:
Canada imported BSE-infected cattle from the UK in the 1990s. There is no indication that the U.S. ever did. :roll:

They can keep telling themselves this. Maybe somebody will believe them. :nod:
Click to expand...


as if all this was ever tested for a TSE :wink:


1994 UK EXPORTS BEEF VEAL USA , MEXICO $ CANADA ONLY
other Countries list in PDF file)

USA -------- TOTALS ''8'' TONS
CANADA -- TOTALS ''29'' TONS

1995 UK EXPORT BEEF AND VEAL TO USA AND CANADA

USA ------- TOTALS ''358'' TONS

CANADA --TOTALS ''24'' TONS

BONE-IN BEEF AND VEAL

USA-------- TOTALS ''10'' TONS (i think this is part of the 358 tons
above?)

UK EXPORT OF LIKE CATTLE TO USA AND CANADA

1986 TO 1996 USA TOTAL = 1297

1986 TO 1996 CAN TOTAL = 299

http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/mb/m11f/tab10.pdf


UK EXPORT MEAT OR OFFAL OF BOVINE ANIMALS DEC 1987

CANADA -- 64,526 KG

UK EXPORT OFFALS OF BOVINE ANIMALS FRESH CHILLED
OR FROZEN OTHER THAN LIVER DEC 1987 YTD

USA -- 45,943 KG

UK EXPORT MEAT OF BOVINE ANIMAL WITH BONE IN 1988

CANADA -- 4,163 KG

PREP OR PRES MEAT OR OFFAL OF BOVINE ANIMALS CUMULATIVE
TO DEC 1988

USA -------- 28,609 KG
CANADA -- 22,044 KG

MEAT OF BOVINE ANIMALS WITH BONE IN CUMULATIVE TO ANUAL 1989

USA -------- 17,880 KG
MEXICO---- 33,444 KG

BONELESS MEAT OF BOVINE 1989

USA --------111,953 KG
CANADA---1,800 KG
MEXICO --- 1,143,387 KG

EDIBLE OFFAL OF BOVINE ANIMALS 1989

USA -------- 19,980 KG
MEXICO--- 31,244 KG

MORE........

MEAT OF BOVINE ANIMALS BONELESS 1990

USA 146,443


http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/mb/m11g/tab05.pdf




UK Exports of Live Cattle by Value 1986-96

USA 697 LIVE CATTLE

CANADA 299 LIVE CATTLE

http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/mb/m11f/tab11.pdf



UK TABLE of Exports of meal of meat and meat offal; greaves 1979 - 1995

USA 24 TONS

CANADA 83 TONS

http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/mb/m12/tab12.pdf



HOWEVER, my files show 44 tons of greaves for USA. ...TSS



Subject: Re: exports from the U.K. of it's MBM to U.S.???
From: [email protected].
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2000 14:03:16 +0000
To: [email protected] (Receipt Notification Requested) (Non Receipt
Notification Requested)

Terry Meat and bonemeal is not specifically classified for overseas trade
purposes. The nearest equivalent is listed as flours and meals of meat or
offals (including tankage), unfit for human consumption; greaves. UK exports
of this to the US are listed below:
Country Tonnes

1980
1981 12
1982
1983
1984 10
1985 2
1986
1987
1988
1989 20
1990

Data for exports between 1975 and 1979 are not readily available. These can
be obtained (at a charge) from data retailers appointed by HM Customs and
Excise: BTSL (Tel: 01372 463121) or Abacus (01245 252222). Best wishes Simon
Pearsall Overseas trade statistics Stats (C&F)C

====================================== END...TSS



BSE GBR RISK ASSESSMENTS, USA, CANADA, AND MEXICO




EFSA Scientific Report on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE-Risk (GBR)
of the United States of America (USA)


Summary of the Scientific Report

The European Food Safety Authority and its Scientific Expert Working Group
on the Assessment of the Geographical Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE)
Risk (GBR) were asked by the European Commission (EC) to provide an
up-to-date scientific report on the GBR in the United States of America,
i.e. the likelihood of the presence of one or more cattle being infected
with BSE, pre-clinically as well as clinically, in USA. This scientific
report addresses the GBR of USA as assessed in 2004 based on data covering
the period 1980-2003.

The BSE agent was probably imported into USA and could have reached domestic
cattle in the middle of the eighties. These cattle imported in the mid
eighties could have been rendered in the late eighties and therefore led to
an internal challenge in the early nineties. It is possible that imported
meat and bone meal (MBM) into the USA reached domestic cattle and leads to
an internal challenge in the early nineties.

A processing risk developed in the late 80s/early 90s when cattle imports
from BSE risk countries were slaughtered or died and were processed (partly)
into feed, together with some imports of MBM. This risk continued to exist,
and grew significantly in the mid 90's when domestic cattle, infected by
imported MBM, reached processing. Given the low stability of the system, the
risk increased over the years with continued imports of cattle and MBM from
BSE risk countries.

EFSA concludes that the current GBR level of USA is III, i.e. it is likely
but not confirmed that domestic cattle are (clinically or pre-clinically)
infected with the BSE-agent. As long as there are no significant changes in
rendering or feeding, the stability remains extremely/very unstable. Thus,
the probability of cattle to be (pre-clinically or clinically) infected with
the BSE-agent persistently increases.


http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/science/tse_assessments/gbr_assessments/573.html





EFSA Scientific Report on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE-Risk (GBR)
of Canada


Summary of the Scientific Report

The European Food Safety Authority and its Scientific Expert Working Group
on the Assessment of the Geographical Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE)
Risk (GBR) were asked to provide an up-to-date scientific report on the GBR
in Canada, i.e. the likelihood of the presence of one or more cattle being
infected with BSE, pre-clinically as well as clinically, in Canada. This
scientific report addresses the GBR of Canada as assessed in 2004 based on
data covering the period 1980-2003.

The BSE agent was probably imported into the country middle of the eighties
and could have reached domestic cattle in the early nineties. These cattle
imported in the mid eighties could have been rendered in the late eighties
and therefore led to an internal challenge in the early 90s. It is possible
that imported meat and bone meal (MBM) into Canada reached domestic cattle
and led to an internal challenge in the early 90s.

A certain risk that BSE-infected cattle entered processing in Canada, and
were at least partly rendered for feed, occurred in the early 1990s when
cattle imported from UK in the mid 80s could have been slaughtered. This
risk continued to exist, and grew significantly in the mid 90's when
domestic cattle, infected by imported MBM, reached processing. Given the low
stability of the system, the risk increased over the years with continued
imports of cattle and MBM from BSE risk countries.

EFSA concludes that the current GBR level of Canada is III, i.e. it is
confirmed at a lower level that domestic cattle are (clinically or
pre-clinically) infected with the BSE-agent. As long as the system remains
unstable, it is expected that the GBR continues to grow, even if no
additional external challenges occur.



http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/science/tse_assessments/gbr_assessments/564.html





EFSA Scientific Report on the Assessment of the Geographical BSE-Risk (GBR)
of Mexico


Last updated: 8 September 2004 Publication Date: 20 August 2004

Adopted July 2004 (Question N° EFSA-Q-2003-083)


Summary of the Scientific Report

The European Food Safety Authority and its Scientific Expert Working Group
on the Assessment of the Geographical Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE)
Risk (GBR) were asked by the European Commission (EC) to provide an
up-to-date scientific report on the GBR in Mexico, i.e. the likelihood of
the presence of one or more cattle being infected with BSE, pre-clinically
as well as clinically, in Mexico. This scientific report addresses the GBR
of Mexico as assessed in 2004 based on data covering the period 1980-2003.

The BSE agent was probably imported into Mexico and could have reached
domestic cattle. These cattle imported could have been rendered and
therefore led to an internal challenge in the mid to late 1990s. It is
possible that imported meat and bone meal (MBM) into Mexico reached domestic
cattle and leads to an internal challenge around 1993.

It is likely that BSE infectivity entered processing at the time of imported
'at - risk' MBM (1993) and at the time of slaughter of imported live 'at -
risk' cattle (mid to late 1990s). The high level of external challenge is
maintained throughout the reference period, and the system has not been made
stable. Thus it is likely that BSE infectivity was recycled and propagated
from approximately 1993. The risk has since grown consistently due to a
maintained internal and external challenge and lack of a stable system.

EFSA concludes that the current geographical BSE risk (GBR) level is III,
i.e. it is likely but not confirmed that domestic cattle are (clinically or
pre-clinically) infected with the BSE-agent. The GBR is likely to increase
due to continued internal and external challenge, coupled with a very
unstable system.



http://www.efsa.europa.eu/




http://madcowusda.blogspot.com/
 
Individual plaintiffs include South Dakota cattle producers Herman Schumacher, Robert Mack, Ernie Mertz, and Wayne Nelson. Plaintiff organizations include: the South Dakota Stockgrowers Association; the Center for Food Safety; the Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease Foundation; Food & Water Watch; Public Citizen, which has 90,000 members; and, the Consumer Federation of America, with 50 million members.
Click to expand...


So terry-- you forget that this is not only R-CALF, but several of the above food and safety groups...Where do these groups stand to gain financially? Why have they filed into this suit?

Your bias against R-CALF, since they thought you were too flakey and flighty to invite you to testify for them, is blinding you to all of whats happening...
 
QUESTION said:
Well i called it but why they didn't wait longer to file ? I guess the thinking is get it over and waste the last of r-calfs finances on a futile last ditch attempt to keep the border closed.
SandH - That is what you asked for and RK answered it and now you are dismissing the answer as opinion. Maybe r-calf should have to prove and provide scientific evidence to support their claims made in that press release OT posted. After all essentially you are saying it is easy to make claims but you want them substanciated. Should r-calf not have to be held to the same standards as everyone else.
I really like the hypocracy of the r-calf press release. Some examples are that r-calf is concerned that canadian cattle will contaminate US cattle feed. So r-calf is admitting the US is not following the feedban rules it set to stop BSE. So if there is any BSE in the US right now which the USDA and R-CALF cannot disprove, it is spreading. So what is r-calf trying to say in the press release, they a liable if someone comes down with vCJD or they are complicit and liable for damages to the US economy when and not if the US finds another US positive.
As for blaming the canadian born washington cow for all the damage to the US beef industry maybe some should remind R-calf that there are 2 indeginous animals that could not be traced to canada and that is why the US beef industry is still having problems with exporting beef.
The accusation that there are way more animals in canada that have BSE and have not been found is totally unfounded and baseless propaganda. Prove it! Oh wait it can't be proven. As far as saying feedbans don't work if they are followed they do. And as far as cross-contamination - if SRMs are removed that eliminates that flaw. And saying that removing SRMs isn't sufficient as a safeguard is just inaccurate it is opinion.
So this is all stuff we have heard before, nothing new no scientific evidence to prove allegations. Oh yeah the science from the CDC is flawed it is based on the numbers of the animals found testing positive. Consider this - the chance of finding a atypical BSE positive animal in the USA is 100 times more likely than in canada. The US has found 2- one in texas and alabama and Canada found one in manitoba. Funny how bad you can make things look when you manipulate numbers.
Click to expand...

That was his opinion and I asked him to back it up. Don't worry about Kaiser and I, we don't always see eye to eye, but we understand each other.

R-CALF can back up their stand with scientific evidence. They can prove that you have BSE in your herd - the very class of animals the USDA wants to bring down here. They can prove your feedban didn't stop the spread of BSE up there. They can prove we have the same feed ban down here that didn't work up there. You're in denial - this is simple stuff, these are big dots to connect.

What you have here is a government agency that is supposed to do all they can to keep disease OUT of this country, but here they are, by their own admission, writing protocol that brings it in! That's beyond rediculous! And their reasoning; "Trade"? :shock:

The CDC is flawed because their findings are based on test results? What are they supposed to include in their calculations, ocean currents?
 
Oldtimer said:
Individual plaintiffs include South Dakota cattle producers Herman Schumacher, Robert Mack, Ernie Mertz, and Wayne Nelson. Plaintiff organizations include: the South Dakota Stockgrowers Association; the Center for Food Safety; the Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease Foundation; Food & Water Watch; Public Citizen, which has 90,000 members; and, the Consumer Federation of America, with 50 million members.
Click to expand...


So terry-- you forget that this is not only R-CALF, but several of the above food and safety groups...Where do these groups stand to gain financially? Why have they filed into this suit?

Your bias against R-CALF, since they thought you were too flakey and flighty to invite you to testify for them, is blinding you to all of whats happening...
Click to expand...



i stand by what i said. for r-calf, this is not, i repeat NOT about consumer safety. it's about cornering the market.

i said it with the USA, i said it about Japan, and i said it about Canada, i have not waivered. all should be banned from exporting there tainted products around the globe, the bse mrr policy is the same thing that the UK did when they tainted the globe with TSE, except the bse mrr made it legal. the bse mrr should be repealed, and the bse gbr risk assessments should be strictly enforced, and even made stronger to include all TSE, especially the BASE, more virulent than the UK BSE, and relates more to some sub-types of sporadic CJD right here in the USA, and not the uk nvCJD. i have not waivered from this. but the r-calf et al wants to be exempt from this through there flawwed junk science. you cannot compare canada's bse problem to the USA, when the USA has been covering up mad cow disease. it's wrong, it's not scientific. it has nothing to do with whether or not i was or was not called to testify, and that reason was simply because i refused to keep silent about the truth of the mad cow situation in the USA. i simply was not going to sit up there and tell half the story. ...


[Docket No. 03-025IFA] FSIS Prohibition of the Use of Specified Risk
Materials for Human Food and Requirement for the Disposition of
Non-Ambulatory Disabled Cattle


9/13/2005

http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/Comments/03-025IFA/03-025IFA-2.pdf


[Docket No. FSIS-2006-0011] FSIS Harvard Risk Assessment of Bovine
Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE)

http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/Comments/2006-0011/2006-0011-1.pdf


Docket No. 03-080-1 -- USDA ISSUES PROPOSED RULE TO ALLOW LIVE ANIMAL IMPORTS FROM CANADA

https://web01.aphis.usda.gov/BSEcom.nsf/0/b78ba677e2b0c12185256dd300649f9d?OpenDocument&AutoFramed


Subject: Importation of Whole Cuts of Boneless Beef from Japan [Docket No. 05-004-1] RIN 0579-AB93 TSS SUBMISSION
Date: August 24, 2005 at 2:47 pm PST
August 24, 2005

Importation of Whole Cuts of Boneless Beef from Japan [Docket No. 05-004-1] RIN 0579-AB93 TSS SUBMISSION


Greetings APHIS ET AL,

My name is Terry S. Singeltary Sr.


I would kindly like to comment on [Docket No. 05-004-1] RIN 0579-AB93 ;


snip...


THE USA is in a most unique situation, one of unknown circumstances with human and animal TSE. THE USA has the most documented TSE in different species to date, with substrains growing in those species (BSE/BASE in cattle and CWD in deer and elk, there is evidence here with different strains), and we know that sheep scrapie has over 20 strains of the typical scrapie with atypical scrapie documented and also BSE is very likely to have passed to sheep. all of which have been
rendered and fed back to animals for human and animal consumption, a frightening scenario. WE do not know the outcome, and to play with human life around the globe with the very likely TSE tainted products from the USA, in my opinion is like playing Russian roulette, of long duration, with potential long and enduring consequences, of which once done, cannot be undone. These are the facts as I have come to know through daily and extensive research of TSE over 9 years, since 12/14/97.
I do not pretend to have all the answers, but i do know to continue to believe in the ukbsenvcjd only theory of transmission to humans of only this one strain from only this one TSE from only this one part of the globe, will only lead to further failures, and needless exposure to humans from all strains of TSE, and possibly many
more needless deaths from TSE via a multitude of proven routes and sources via many studies with primates and rodents and other species.



MY personal belief, since you ask, is that not only the Canadian border, but the USA border, and the Mexican border should be sealed up tighter than a drum for exporting there TSE tainted products, until a validated, 100% sensitive test is available, and all animals for human and animal consumption are tested. all we are doing is the exact same thing the UK did with there mad cow poisoning when they exported it all over the globe, all the while knowing what they were doing. this BSE MRR policy is nothing more than a legal tool to do just exactly what the UK did, thanks to the OIE and GW, it's legal now. and they executed Saddam for poisoning ???

go figure. ...




Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
P.O. Box 42
Bacliff, Texas USA 77518



Comment Submitted
Comment Receipt

Thank you. Your comment on Document ID: APHIS-2006-0041-0001 has been sent. Comment Tracking Number: APHIS-2006-0041-DRAFT-0028

Attachments:
C:\My Music\My Documents\APHIS-2006-0041_January 28.doc


If you wish to retain a copy of the receipt, use the following link to print a copy for your files. Print



http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main


THE only difference between the UK poisoning the globe, and the USA, it is now legal with GWs and OIEs BSE MRR policy ;



IT's O.K. to poison 3rd world countries ;


http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1994/05/20002001.pdf


On 20 February 1990, Dr Pickles wrote to Ms Verity
(APS/CMO). Dr Picklesí minute included the following:
1. Mr Meldrum is arguing that MAFF have already taken all the
necessary and responsible steps to warn importing countries
of the BSE dangers in UK meat and bone meal. Yet the action taken
so far overseas suggest the message has not got
through, or where it has this has been late. The first nation
that woke up to the danger did so a year after our own feed
ban. It seems even now several EC countries neither ban our
imports or the general feeding of ruminant protein. It also
seems the OIE and CVO have yet to inform the rest of the world.
2. I do not see how this can be claimed to be responsibleí. We
do not need an expert group of the Scientific Veterinary
Committee to tell us British meat and bone meal is unsafe for
ruminants. I fail to understand why this cannot be tackled
from the British end which seems to be the only sure way of doing
it, preferably by banning exports. As CMO says in his
letter of 3 January surely it is short sighted for us to risk
being seen in future as having been responsible for the
introduction of BSE to the food chain in other countries.íí[79]

http://www.bse.org.uk/dfa/dfa25.htm

http://www.mad-cow.org/00/jul00_dont_eat_sheep.html#hhh



PLEASE NOTE IN USA CJD UPDATE AS AT JUNE 2007, please note steady increase
in ''TYPE UNKNOWN''. ...TSS


1 Acquired in the United Kingdom; 2 Acquired in Saudi Arabia; 3 Includes 17
inconclusive and 9 pending (1 from 2006, 8
from 2007); 4 Includes 17 non-vCJD type unknown (2 from 1996, 2 from 1997, 1
from 2001, 1 from 2003, 4 from 2004, 3
from 2005, 4 from 2006) and 36 type pending (2 from 2005, 8 from 2006,

*** 26 from 2007)



http://www.cjdsurveillance.com/pdf/case-table.pdf


Monitoring the occurrence of emerging forms of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease in
the United States


http://cjdusa.blogspot.com/


i am reminded of a few things deep throat (high ranking official at usda)
told me years ago;


==========================================


The most frightening thing I have read all day is the
report of Gambetti's finding of a new strain of
sporadic cjd in young people.........Dear God,


https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7842737484277562285&postID=5759550357128128100



BSE BASE MAD COW TESTING TEXAS, USA, AND CANADA, A REVIEW OF SORTS


http://madcowtesting.blogspot.com/


MADCOW USDA the untold story

http://madcowusda.blogspot.com/



MADCOW USDA the untold story continued

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=6472149427883113751&postID=4829467681293855400



USA NOR-98 SCRAPIE UPDATE AUGUST 31, 2007 RISES TO 5 DOCUMENTED CASES


http://nor-98.blogspot.com/


Government Accountability Project




https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=3995372399492420922&postID=295754279213239559




tss
 
Individual plaintiffs include Herman Schumacher, Robert Mack, Ernie Mertz, and Wayne Nelson. Plaintiff organizations include: the Center for Food Safety; the Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease Foundation; Food & Water Watch; Public Citizen, which has 90,000 members; and, the Consumer Federation of America, with 50 million members
Click to expand...

I have a tough time understanding what you're talking about sometimes-- but I gather you want actions taken to stop the shipping of this disease around the world...

So forgetting that R-CALF is involved --- do you agree with these consumer and public health organizations, that claim to represent millions, and these individuals to file this action to do something toward what you say should be done--stopping the spread of this dread disease that killed your mother ?????
 
We will see how strong the supposed science r-calf has is? And if the border does or doesn't open to OTM's from canada later this month. They had better have something new. The science used for the rule 2 hearing wasn't strong enough as evident by the fact the USDA planned to open the border. Sand H are you saying r-calf has evidence of a conspiracy to cover up bse in canada :roll: You can say there could be more BSE in canada, but proving there is more BSE positive animal is an entirely another thing. As far as proving the canadian feedban didn't in canada how can it be proven that all infection comes from a canadian animal sorce? After the manitoba cow was found to have atypical bse the same strain as in the US indeginouse animals care to explain that? Or how about this the majority of animals have come from 2 areas which is typical of the disease the Northern Alberta region can be explained as contamination from positive animal imported from the UK , But the frazier valley in BC that gets most of it feed supplements from washington state make your own conclusions. And as for your feedban working and the canadian one not when they were the exactly the same you can try to sell that somewhere else. Comm'n SandH the fight to get the Texas cow retested to prove a positive proved that BSE is being missed in the US so comparing positive number from 2 different countries with 2 different systems is not accurate. Comparing grape fruit and coco nuts again just not a good idea. So just saying because i said so doesn't prove a thing r-calf will have to do better than that when they make accusations and say they can prove things. Do you guys get it i by no means am a legal expert and i can put reasonable doubt in your arguments, how bad will real litigators tear you guys up? All i can say is i think it will be a blood bath with r-calf supplying the blood.
 
Questionable-- Civil trials and civil hearings aren't decided on reasonable doubt-- its preponderance of the evidence...If you feel one side is 51% more correct than the other--then that is the direction they decide.....
 
We will wait and see when the border opens to OTMs. Launch all the suits you guys want eventually you will run into an unbias jury and then you will get beaten. I have no doubts. But yell and scream about the sky falling i still have not been hit by a cloud and hurt yet.
 
Q, "We will see how strong the supposed science r-calf has is?"

"Supposed science" :lol: :lol: You're in denial.

Q, " Sand H are you saying r-calf has evidence of a conspiracy to cover up bse in canada."

No.... :shock: It's common knowledge that you have it.

Q, "You can say there could be more BSE in canada, but proving there is more BSE positive animal is an entirely another thing."

Even your own government won't bet a nickel on that! Denial....

Q, "And as for your feedban working and the canadian one not when they were the exactly the same you can try to sell that somewhere else"

We know we've got problems down here, too. We're not denying that and have even brought them up. However, it must be over your head that those of us who recognize the wrecklessness of opening the border have cited OUR problems as part of the reason that it is idiotic to needlessly expose ourselves to a risk we are vulernable to!

Q, " So just saying because i said so doesn't prove a thing r-calf will have to do better than that when they make accusations and say they can prove things. Do you guys get it i by no means am a legal expert and i can put reasonable doubt in your arguments, how bad will real litigators tear you guys up? All i can say is i think it will be a blood bath with r-calf supplying the blood."

R-CALF is begging to get in front of a jury, that's exactly what they want! They already tore up the USDA in District Court and they've got a bunch of Congressmen convinced and speaking out. Can you come up with a single Congressman that has spoke out in defense of the USDA? That should tell you something about their chances in court. "R-CALF supplying the blood"... :lol: :lol: :lol:
 
Sandhusker said:
They already tore up the USDA in District Court and they've got a bunch of Congressmen convinced and speaking out. Can you come up with a single Congressman that has spoke out in defense of the USDA?
Click to expand...






Sandhusker, look at the states where that bunch of Congressmen, that are speaking-out are from. Could their speaking-out, be more about votes, and being re-elected?


Best Regards
Ben Roberts
 
Ben Roberts said:
Sandhusker said:
They already tore up the USDA in District Court and they've got a bunch of Congressmen convinced and speaking out. Can you come up with a single Congressman that has spoke out in defense of the USDA?
Click to expand...






Sandhusker, look at the states where that bunch of Congressmen, that are speaking-out are from. Could their speaking-out, be more about votes, and being re-elected?


Best Regards
Ben Roberts
Click to expand...


You're not suggesting they're following the wishes of their constituancy are you? Heaven forbid that would ever happen in Washington.

I'll give you the same challenge I put to Q; find me ONE other Congressman who is saying the USDA is right. If there is a large group of voters who believe the USDA's decision is solid, doesn't it stand to reason that at least one Congressman would be catering to them? I don't see any. Find me ONE who is speaking out.
 
Sand it is good is so wet today. As for your supposed r-calf science you admit the US has a BSE problem but the extent is not know so how can you say it is going to be worse if canadian otms are allowed in. It is not logical saying a unknown situation will be made worse. How can that be if you do not know how bad the situation is in the US right now?
It is common knowledge in north korea your president is the devil. Common knowledge is anecdotal evidence, let alone based on the group you are surverying. So provide scientific evidence that there are as many positives as you CLAIM. PROVE your CLAIMS.
As for your congressmen speaking out they seem to be r-calf supporters for years. If you could show me new guys speaking out and have enough to win a vote. Not just a small group of self serving politicans. If you truely have enough to win votes this wouldn't be going to court you would have a law made to ban OTM's. So don't go there.
 
Q, "Sand it is good is so wet today. As for your supposed r-calf science you admit the US has a BSE problem but the extent is not know so how can you say it is going to be worse if canadian otms are allowed in. It is not logical saying a unknown situation will be made worse. How can that be if you do not know how bad the situation is in the US right now?"

It doesn't matter what you start with, if you add to it, you have more.

Q "It is common knowledge in north korea your president is the devil. Common knowledge is anecdotal evidence, let alone based on the group you are surverying. So provide scientific evidence that there are as many positives as you CLAIM. PROVE your CLAIMS."

I have to prove to you that you have BSE?

Q, "As for your congressmen speaking out they seem to be r-calf supporters for years. If you could show me new guys speaking out and have enough to win a vote. Not just a small group of self serving politicans. If you truely have enough to win votes this wouldn't be going to court you would have a law made to ban OTM's. So don't go there."

Once again, point out a Congressman backing the USDA. There's 500 some of them, find ONE.
 
How do you know you are adding to a problem if you do not find problem animals. And you admit you do not know the extent of your problem. Provide proof there are more BSE positives in canada right now and i would say keep OTM's out of the US from canada. I will even tour you around up here and you can pick out the animals from my place and my neighbors and we will get them tested if you will agree to buy all the BSE free beef. And after a predetermined number of animals are tested and all found negative i think it only fair you lead the movement to have the movement of OTM cattle to the US. What do you think? I already test every OTM animal i slaughter or dispose of and have yet to find a positive.I am willing to put up are you?
 
QUESTION said:
How do you know you are adding to a problem if you do not find problem animals. And you admit you do not know the extent of your problem. Provide proof there are more BSE positives in canada right now and i would say keep OTM's out of the US from canada. I will even tour you around up here and you can pick out the animals from my place and my neighbors and we will get them tested if you will agree to buy all the BSE free beef. And after a predetermined number of animals are tested and all found negative i think it only fair you lead the movement to have the movement of OTM cattle to the US. What do you think? I already test every OTM animal i slaughter or dispose of and have yet to find a positive.I am willing to put up are you?
Click to expand...



:lol2: :lol2: :lol2: :lol2: :lol2:

That's pretty funny, Question!

:lol2: :lol2: :lol2: :lol2: :lol2:

Yup, pretty funny. Because it would make that screeching lil r-calfer actually do something practical to prove his point!

Which they will never do. Because they do not want to know the truth. Because they cannot handle the truth. They want to stay in the dark because they are nothing but protectionist hypocrites


Question, did you think that they actually WANT to know the truth? That's pretty funny! They fooled ya!

:lol2: :lol2: :lol2: :lol2: :lol2:
 
I have to provide proof there are more BSE animals up there and I'm the one who can't handle the truth? You've gone past denial and are now in lunacy.

I guess Canada can completely abandon the BSE program, nobody has proven there is any more. No more testing, no more feed ban, throw all the SRMs into hot dogs again....

You mention the BSE problem down here; How can you two clowns make those insinuations unless you can prove there is any more BSE down here? Is that how this works?
 
I have proof from samples taken from my OTM cattle i have disposed of they are clean of BSE. Are you saying it is lunacy for me to test every OTM animal i dispose of and collect the government fees for submitting the samples to KNOW my animals are BSE free? As far as a BSE problem in the US i was taking your word for it, as you said the US had problems with BSE so were you lying to me about that? If the US would only change their policies and make human health the top proiority and not profits. All your government would have to do is have a feedban without loopholes adopt the same srm rules as canada and then enforce the new rules it could eliminate this disease but the people in power seem to care less about the public than profits.
 
Sandhusker said:
I have to provide proof there are more BSE animals up there and I'm the one who can't handle the truth? You've gone past denial and are now in lunacy.

I guess Canada can completely abandon the BSE program, nobody has proven there is any more. No more testing, no more feed ban, throw all the SRMs into hot dogs again....

You mention the BSE problem down here; How can you two clowns make those insinuations unless you can prove there is any more BSE down here? Is that how this works?
Click to expand...

I must have touched a nerve there lil buddy, because you are getting into the irrationality and name-calling again!

:lol2: :lol2: :lol2: :lol2: :lol2: :tiphat:
 
Q, "If the US would only change their policies and make human health the top proiority and not profits."

That would mean going back to the original plan of a zero tolerance policy on importing from BSE positive countries. That would be the end of their "sound science" doctrine. That would mean no cattle/beef trade with Canada.
 

Latest posts

Top