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

Tam & Bill

Help Support Ranchers.net:

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
Kids, I just spent about an hour doing research for you. Guess what, I think that I'm wrong on one item. Before you get too excited about that, what I was wrong about only makes the USDA's efforts more disturbing.

What I think I'm wrong on is the OIE changing classifications. I thought they changed classifications after the USDA leaned on them. I can find no evidence of that. Instead, I find the USDA making a request and the OIE REJECTING that request. On Sept. 26, 2003, the USDA sent a request to the OIE to revise their classifications. The request was handled by the OIE's BSE expert group and REJECTED because, "The scientific basis used in the present code is still valid". What they were saying was, "We made these rules based on what we knew, and we don't know anything different, so why would we change anything?"

What did the USDA do then? They went ahead and made up their own rules to create a "minimal risk" classification anyway. The claim that their classification being based on OIE recommendations is a half truth - they cherry picked what they wanted and ignored the rest. Sure, their requirements are also requirements of the OIE, but they only took the easy ones! It's like me saying my mutt is just like my neighbors champion bird dog - they're both black, have four legs, and bark. I'm just not mentioning my dog is gun-shy and afraid of ducks. But hey, I'm not REALLY lying, am I? You can't tell any difference by just looking at them - they're alike!

And you wonder why R-CALF is torked off?
 

Bill

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
2,066
Reaction score
0
Location
GWN
:roll: :roll: :lol: :lol: :oops: :oops: :roll: :roll:

Of course Sandhusker has no facts. He never has, that's what makes him the perfect R-Calf disciple. Let us know if you ever come up with something worth refuting Sandhusker. :roll:
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
Bill said:
:roll: :roll: :lol: :lol: :oops: :oops: :roll: :roll:

Of course Sandhusker has no facts. He never has, that's what makes him the perfect R-Calf disciple. Let us know if you ever come up with something worth refuting Sandhusker. :roll:

You know, Bill, you're just the typical basher. Just a never-ending stream of negetive mindless babble. You asked for facts, I presented them, and you still claim I have none. That tells me you either can't recognize facts or aren't interested in them. Don't ask me for any facts again.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandbag: "And you wonder why R-CALF is torked off?"

No, that's not hard to understand. R-CALF doesn't think far enough ahead to realize that:

1. The Standards they set for Canada, if not justified, may be established against the U.S. by our export markets since we also had a native case of BSE.

2. Any standards must consider the BSE precautionary measures that have been taken to address BSE and those standard must be upgraded to account for such precautionary measures.


Anyone with any common sense can see that R-CULT's BSE concerns go as far as stopping Canadian imports. Political bullsh*t!


~SH~
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
~SH~ said:
Sandbag: "And you wonder why R-CALF is torked off?"

No, that's not hard to understand. R-CALF doesn't think far enough ahead to realize that:

1. The Standards they set for Canada, if not justified, may be established against the U.S. by our export markets since we also had a native case of BSE.

2. Any standards must consider the BSE precautionary measures that have been taken to address BSE and those standard must be upgraded to account for such precautionary measures.


Anyone with any common sense can see that R-CULT's BSE concerns go as far as stopping Canadian imports. Political bullsh*t!


~SH~

1. The standards we set don't mean squat to other countries. Perfect example - What we do for Canada and what Japan does for us. Figure it out, SH. Do you know what a NON-BINDING GUIDELINE is? Any country can do whatever they want to with us, and ARE. Why guess when the proof is already on the table?

2. The OIE doesn't agree with you. They say the "The scientific basis used in the present code is still valid". It appears you know more about BSE than they do. Maybe you should drop them a line.

R-CALF doesn't have to "think" about this. It's already laid out. It's already history.
 

Bill

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
2,066
Reaction score
0
Location
GWN
Sandhusker said:
Bill said:
:roll: :roll: :lol: :lol: :oops: :oops: :roll: :roll:

Of course Sandhusker has no facts. He never has, that's what makes him the perfect R-Calf disciple. Let us know if you ever come up with something worth refuting Sandhusker. :roll:

You know, Bill, you're just the typical basher. Just a never-ending stream of negetive mindless babble. You asked for facts, I presented them, and you still claim I have none. That tells me you either can't recognize facts or aren't interested in them. Don't ask me for any facts again.

Facts like you posted above?

What I think I'm wrong on is the OIE changing classifications. I thought they changed classifications after the USDA leaned on them. I can find no evidence of that.
Your spinning so much you must be dizzy. :lol: :oops: :lol: Do you know what facts are or is it that you have trouble differentiating between reality and what you believe to have happened.
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2005
Messages
7,060
Reaction score
0
Location
TX
Bill said:
Sandhusker said:
Bill said:
:roll: :roll: :lol: :lol: :oops: :oops: :roll: :roll:

Of course Sandhusker has no facts. He never has, that's what makes him the perfect R-Calf disciple. Let us know if you ever come up with something worth refuting Sandhusker. :roll:

You know, Bill, you're just the typical basher. Just a never-ending stream of negetive mindless babble. You asked for facts, I presented them, and you still claim I have none. That tells me you either can't recognize facts or aren't interested in them. Don't ask me for any facts again.

Facts like you posted above?

What I think I'm wrong on is the OIE changing classifications. I thought they changed classifications after the USDA leaned on them. I can find no evidence of that.
Your spinning so much you must be dizzy. :lol: :oops: :lol: Do you know what facts are or is it that you have trouble differentiating between reality and what you believe to have happened.

Bill, what part of Sandhusker's post do you disagree with or are you into the show the proof game of SH?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
1. The standards we set don't mean squat to other countries. Perfect example - What we do for Canada and what Japan does for us. Figure it out, SH. Do you know what a NON-BINDING GUIDELINE is? Any country can do whatever they want to with us, and ARE. Why guess when the proof is already on the table?

When R-CALF filed their phony injunction against Canada, South Korea said that they would not import anything from the U.S. that we were unwilling to import from Canada.

How we treat others does influence how they treat us. Only an fool like you would try to convince yourself otherwise.


2. The OIE doesn't agree with you. They say the "The scientific basis used in the present code is still valid".

When we had BSE in our native herd, your fearless leader Leo McDonnell said we had the safest beef in the world due to our firewalls". Now if those firewalls deem our beef safe, they must also deem Canadian beef safe because they are the same firewalls.

You can't two step around this Sandbag if you want to salvage what little credibility you might have left.


Keep lying to yourself Sandbag. Keep nodding your head as you're told what you want to believe. Give that R-CALF turbin another wrap.


~SH~
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
SH, "When R-CALF filed their phony injunction against Canada, South Korea said that they would not import anything from the U.S. that we were unwilling to import from Canada."

So YOU say. You've been asked to provide the Koreans actually saying that, but you have yet to do so. Here's a little test for you SH; Are the Koreans currently importing from us what we are importing from Canada? If you speak the truth, they will be.

SH, "How we treat others does influence how they treat us. Only an fool like you would try to convince yourself otherwise"

Then why doesn't Japan treat us as we are treating Canada? Why not Taiwan? Why not Egypt?
 

Bill

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
2,066
Reaction score
0
Location
GWN
Then why doesn't Japan treat us as we are treating Canada? Why not Taiwan? Why not Egypt?
Because although Canada and the US are in the same risk catagory, the US has been proven to have hidden at least one case of BSE and possibly more along with allowing BSE infected meat into the human food supply and SRMs in export product. If these things hadn't happened I am quite confident other importing countries would treat the US the same as Canada.

Hopefully they will soon realize that US beef is just as safe as Canadian.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandbag: "Are the Koreans currently importing from us what we are importing from Canada?"

I don't know without doing the research. I only know what they said.


Sandbag: "Then why doesn't Japan treat us as we are treating Canada? Why not Taiwan? Why not Egypt?"

We sent spinal material to Japan after we said we would not.

I didn't say that other countries would treat us exactly as we treat others, I said how we treat others INFLUENCES how they will treat us. As far as Egypt and Taiwan, you are comparing apples to oranges again because Egypt doesn't import the same products as other countries do. They import beef by products such as livers and tongues. In other words, edible ofal.

Another of your typical apples to oranges comparisons.


~SH~
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
~SH~ said:
Sandbag: "Are the Koreans currently importing from us what we are importing from Canada?"

SH, "I don't know without doing the research. I only know what they said."

Do some research, then.


Sandbag: "Then why doesn't Japan treat us as we are treating Canada? Why not Taiwan? Why not Egypt?"

SH, "We sent spinal material to Japan after we said we would not. I didn't say that other countries would treat us exactly as we treat others, I said how we treat others INFLUENCES how they will treat us. As far as Egypt and Taiwan, you are comparing apples to oranges again because Egypt doesn't import the same products as other countries do. They import beef by products such as livers and tongues. In other words, edible ofal.
Another of your typical apples to oranges comparisons."

Oh, it only INFLUENCES what they do! Now I get it. So there may be other factors? Dang, why didn't I think of that! :roll:
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2005
Messages
7,060
Reaction score
0
Location
TX
~SH~ said:
Sandbag: "Are the Koreans currently importing from us what we are importing from Canada?"

I don't know without doing the research. I only know what they said.


Sandbag: "Then why doesn't Japan treat us as we are treating Canada? Why not Taiwan? Why not Egypt?"

We sent spinal material to Japan after we said we would not.

I didn't say that other countries would treat us exactly as we treat others, I said how we treat others INFLUENCES how they will treat us. As far as Egypt and Taiwan, you are comparing apples to oranges again because Egypt doesn't import the same products as other countries do. They import beef by products such as livers and tongues. In other words, edible ofal.

Another of your typical apples to oranges comparisons.


~SH~

Isn't that what Johanns and Goodlatte found out?

SH, you need to stop delving in the fruit basket. Everyone here knows who you are.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Conman: "Everyone here knows who you are."

Which means I am held accountable. In contrast, nobody knows who you are so you can lie on every post and never be held accountable. Anonymous is exactly where a liar like you needs to be.



~SH~
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2005
Messages
7,060
Reaction score
0
Location
TX
~SH~ said:
Conman: "Everyone here knows who you are."

Which means I am held accountable. In contrast, nobody knows who you are so you can lie on every post and never be held accountable. Anonymous is exactly where a liar like you needs to be.



~SH~

Let me clarify my last post, SH. YOU ARE A FRUITBASKET!
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
Bill said:
Then why doesn't Japan treat us as we are treating Canada? Why not Taiwan? Why not Egypt?
Because although Canada and the US are in the same risk catagory, the US has been proven to have hidden at least one case of BSE and possibly more along with allowing BSE infected meat into the human food supply and SRMs in export product. If these things hadn't happened I am quite confident other importing countries would treat the US the same as Canada.

Hopefully they will soon realize that US beef is just as safe as Canadian.

Your confidence is duly noted! :lol: The facts remain, NOBODY - with the possible exception of Mexico - is treating the US the same as the US is treating Canada. Yet, you continue the chant? Why? In the face of facts that prove you wrong, WHY?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Conman: "Let me clarify my last post, SH. YOU ARE A FRUITBASKET!"

Talk is cheap Conman!

How many lies have you told today?


~SH~
 

Latest posts

Top