Totally predictable responses to BSE announcement.

[Anonymous]

Randy: "Laws change every day SH. Free enterprise is not written in stone. Packers, just like every other business in the free world lobbies for change that will benefit themselves."

Of course everyone lobbies for their own personal benefit.

Randy: "I don't know if it means a change of law, but do you honestly think that two years worth of excessive profits in one sector of the beef industry vs. excessive loss in the other should go on forever."

Where did that come from?

I can't believe you can derive such a conclusion from anything I have posted.

When did I suggest excessive profits in the packing industry in Canada should go on forever or that producers should not work to capture that processing value themselves?

I sure didn't say that or even imply that!

I think you have a reading comprehension problem.

Randy: "Should we just continue to watch equity erode on the farm while packers have a hayday, hayyear, haydecade?"

Excessive packer profits won't go on forever.

One of two things will happen:

1. The border will open and you will once again have enough slaugher capacity options for your cattle in both Canada and the U.S.

2. Processing expansion in Canada will take place to account for all of the cattle produced in Canada putting competition back in proper order.

Write it down and hold me to it.

This is so elementary!

Today: Canadian cattle numbers exceed Canadian slaugher capacity.

Tomorrow: Canadian cattle numbers equal to Canadian slaughter capacity.

Why is that so difficult for you to understand and accept!

Either the packers will increase their slaughter capacity to restore competition or the producers will do it themselves. Either way, packer profit margins will narrow back to a competitive situation. When there is dollars to be made, someone will make those dollars until competition squeezes out the less efficient processor. The more efficient processor will pay more for cattle than the less efficient processor.

Randy: " You have lumped myself and others in your packer blamer category while not considering any of our movement forward in our "Free Market" producer ownership proposals. Iown beef til it hit's the restaurant plate. I am a director for BIG C who has a plant proposal with producers owning the plant."

I sincerely commend you for your efforts to control your own financial destiny. That's wonderful!

Nothing I would rather see!

Instead of wasting time blaming the large corporate packers for taking advantage of your situation of having more cattle than slaughter capacity, I'd much rather discuss Big C and similar producer ventures.

I don't know where you can say that I have lumped other Canadian producers into the packer blaming category. You're the only one really complaining about it.

Randy: "My point about packer profits in Canada is that this is the most severe event that the North American beef industry has ever experienced economically. Your complete lack of interest in discussing this shows total disregard for producers of Canada, who brought none of this on themselves. Sure it's legal, but is it not worthy of any discussion. I am sure that if the system would somehow work (which I know is impossible) whereby producers pocketed mutimillions and packers were going broke, discussion would run rampant."

Once again, what good does it do to discuss it unless you want to discuss what you are going to do about it?

Complaining about it doesn't change it. Discussing solutions does!

Randy: "Opening the border to boxed beef created a new market for product, but created no new competition. In fact it shut out the plants that could not access fats from Canada, thus eliminating competition."

Opening the border to boxed beef did not create a new market for product. It resumed your traditional market for product.

Where do you think your cattle market would be today if it was not for the fact that you are exporting beef to the United States?

How can you possibly believe that you would be better off without the U.S. market TODAY?

What do you mean it shut out the plants that could not access fats from Canada? Explain yourself! You're talking in circles and not making sense.

Randy: "SH you are lost. Your perception is blurred by your entrenched thought. You are the one who cannot think and reason beyond blaming anyone who sees life different than you and maye Agman."

Your inability to disprove anything I have stated with opposing facts shows who is lost. Your comfort zone is making these types of discrediting statements when you can't contradict anything I have stated WITH OPPOSING FACTS.

Randy: "What kind of packing proposal would include marketing predictions based on today's market."

Where did that come from?

Randy: "Producer owned plants may have a chance to bid against Cargill and Tyson and force them to pay a fair price once one of those two things happen, but the profits made in two years by these two mutinational giants have insured them a major role in Canada for many many years to come."

Why would producer owned plants have to bid for any cattle????

They should have their own captive supply of cattle from their producer investors.

If Tyson and Cargill could buy cattle away from these producer owned packing plants what does that tell you about competition?

If there is no competition, they couldn't get the cattle bought could they?

Congratulations, you have successfully defeated your own argument again.

You seem to be under the assumption that there is no competition BETWEEN Cargill and Tyson and that is absolutely false. The only reason they BOTH have leverage now is because Canada has more cattle than slaughter capacity. Why is that so hard to understand?

Canada would not have more cattle than slaughter capacity if both Cargill and Tyson expanded their slaughter capacity to account for those cattle. To assume at that point that there would be no competition due to only two players is to suggest that Cargill and Tyson are not competing against eachother for the cattle.

Is that what you believe?

Come on, challenge me on this and bring the facts that you have to support your assertion that Cargill and Tyson are not in competition with eachother to buy fat cattle ONCE SLAUGHTER CAPACITY EQUALS THE NUMBER OF CANADIAN CATTLE.

Randy: "How about me saying things are just fine down here on the farm SH, as long as I just stack bales and keep my mouth shut. And if I go broke it will be all my fault. That's what you want to hear from me isn't it."

No, I want to hear how you are going to assure that you never find yourself in a situation without a market for your beef and how you will never find yourself in a situation of more cattle than slaughter capacity.

I want to hear SOLUTIONS to the problem! We already discussed the problem over and over and over.



~SH~

 

[rkaiser]

You are right SH. I am the only person in Canada who doesn't like the fact that the packers have made enormous amounts of money while the producers of this country are going broke. :roll:

You are also the champ SH.

I give.

I cannot grab a sentence from your posts and tear them apart like you. Choosing the ones you feel most comfortable to tear and leaving those you don't really like. Well done. A in debate class I'll bet.

Your skill is admirable.

Nothing you have said has taught me a thing, and everything I have said has been ignored by you. But you do a fantastic job and you will sleep well tonight knowing you have succeeded in ? something.

Keep up the fight you "Defender of Free Enterprise" you "Champion of the Packers".

 

[Anonymous]

Great job diverting the issue Randy!

Randy: "You are right SH. I am the only person in Canada who doesn't like the fact that the packers have made enormous amounts of money while the producers of this country are going broke."

Never said anything of the sort!

To the contrary, I don't know any producers in Canada that like the fact that packers had leverage due to the closed Canadian border resulting in more cattle than slaughter capacity.

Why do you think you have to make stuff up?

Anyone can review the posts and see for themselves that I never said anything of the sort.

Randy: "Nothing you have said has taught me a thing, and everything I have said has been ignored by you."

Another untrue statement. I just acknowledged your participation in Big C but you are so mad at me for not sharing in your packer blame that you can't even acknowledge that.

Oh well!

The only reason I haven't taught you anything is because you don't want to hear the truth about competition between Tyson and Cargill. You don't want to believe it so you don't but their profit margins in the U.S. prove they are competitors.



~SH~

 

[rkaiser]

SH

Instead of wasting time blaming the large corporate packers for taking advantage of your situation of having more cattle than slaughter capacity, I'd much rather discuss Big C and similar producer ventures.

I don't know where you can say that I have lumped other Canadian producers into the packer blaming category. You're the only one really complaining about it.

SH then said -

Why do you think you have to make stuff up?

Anyone can review the posts and see for themselves that I never said anything of the sort.

Keep playing with yourself SH.

You are right about my not agreeing with you about competition IN Canada. Like I said before, come on up and interview some feedlot owners and see for yourself. It's a free for all up here.

Competition was drastically altered the day the border closed, admit it.
A supply and demand needs competition to function properly, and CANADA'S MARKET IS NOT FUNCTIONING PROPERLY.

Your perception is differnet than mine. But I do not make things up and more than you live in some packer loving dream world. I may not get my message to your brain the way you are used to getting information, but there is every bit as much truth in what I say as what you say.

Prove me to be a liar SH.

It does not matter what anyone says to you SH, your mind is made up. Anything that challenges packers is seen as blame. You love the word. You sleep with one arguement. Blamer Blamer Blamer.

 

[Bill]

To the contrary, I don't know any producers in Canada that like the fact that packers had leverage due to the closed Canadian border resulting in more cattle than slaughter capacity.

Leverage.........such a quaint, politically acceptable word....leverage. :roll:

 

[cowsense]

I take extreme offense against your continual crusade against the beef industry; you always claim that you don't have an ulterior agenda yet you never stop in your attempts to discredit the industry! You've gone way overboard when you start making false ,baseless accusations about the Canadian surveillance program. Do some research before you spout off!We have been extremely forthright in all dealings with BSE and our targetted surveillance program goes way beyond OIE recommendations. In the meantime we continue to lose billions primarily due to the false perceptions that have been used to limit trade cloaked under the guise of "food safety". quote="reader (the Second)"]

By the way "Richard" is my husband......if he gets on here......well its going to be very entertaining to say the least..................LOL!!!!!!!

Sorry to be dense. Who is Richard?

I do agree with you Cowgal that competition is the way of the world. More than that I think that this is about public health and consumer and trading partner confidence and that if EITHER Canada or the U.S. continues to brush away the BSE issue and substitute smoke and mirrors for surveillance, they will suffer.

Canadians cannot be too smug about this by the way, since your system is essentially like the U.S. system. I'm also not sure you have as many checks and balances built in to your government as we do, so while you may be slightly better than the U.S. today in surveillance, you could be behind quickly. I am basing this on what I have heard from you all, read, and Canadians I met a year ago on PEI, so correct me if you have surveillance under control, but I doubt it. I think you took good immediate measures and will not go any further unless pushed.[/quote]

 

[Anonymous]

Randy: "Competition was drastically altered the day the border closed, admit it. A supply and demand needs competition to function properly, and CANADA'S MARKET IS NOT FUNCTIONING PROPERLY."

With that statement you have removed all doubt that you have a serious reading comprehension problem or you are joining Sandhusker in his little game of making statements you know are untrue, just to piss me off.

How many times do I have to acknowledge, "the closing of the Canadian border created a situation of more cattle than slaughter capacity in Canada clearly giving the Canadian packers the leverage to lower prices" in order for you to understand THAT I UNDERSTAND your situation?????

Twenty times perhaps?

Not once have I ever stated anything to suggest that I did not understand the packer leverage situation in Canada.

Just because I don't join in you in blaming the packers for taking advantage of that situation does not mean I don't understand the situation.

Canadian packers have leverage due to more cattle than slaughter capacity.

There, I said it again.

You either have a serious reading comprehension problem or you are so emotional you are not even bothering to read what I have written.

You're not drinking and typing are you?


Let's see how many other times I have acknowledged Canada's situation just in this thread alone to prove my point on your inability to comprehend what you are reading ............



June 28 - 8:52PM

SH: "Name one thing you taught us about the Canadian packing industry besides how to blame them for profiting during a period of excessive supplies thanks to R-CULT keeping the border closed."

June 29 - 12:05PM

SH: "Do you want your government to step in and force packers to pay more money for Canadian fat cattle when the supply exceeds the demand and have them stop investing in increased slaughter capacity so you can make that investment yourself ???"

June 30 - 8:03AM

SH: "I realize the Canadian situation is unique due to suddenly finding yourself with more cattle than slaughter capacity from a closed Canadian border. I sympathize with that plight but my sympathy doesn't change the situation."

June 30 - 8:03AM

SH: "The Canadian packer clearly has the leverage due to more cattle than slaughter capacity."

How much clearer could I be than that?


June 30 - 10:27AM

SH: "Is profit making during a period where Canadian packers had more cattle than slaughtering capacity illegal???

How much clearer could I be than that?


June 30 - 10:00PM

SH: "When did I suggest excessive profits in the packing industry in Canada should go on forever or that producers should not work to capture that processing value themselves?"

June 30 - 10:00PM

SH: "Excessive packer profits won't go on forever."

June 30 - 10:00PM

SH: "Today: Canadian cattle numbers exceed Canadian slaugher capacity.

Tomorrow: Canadian cattle numbers equal to Canadian slaughter capacity.

Why is that so difficult for you to understand and accept!"

You'd think it would have sunk in that time!


June 30 - 10:56PM

SH: "To the contrary, I don't know any producers in Canada that like the fact that packers had leverage due to the closed Canadian border resulting in more cattle than slaughter capacity."

Still didn't get it.


That's 9 times that I acknowledged the packer leverage situation in Canada yet you ask me to admit that "Competition was drastically altered the day the border closed"????????


Now I know why this thread has been so frustrating. You can't comprehend what you are reading.



~SH~

 

[rkaiser]

Then why do you go on and on about competition driving price in Canada SH?

What is altered competition? "Lack of competition", "No competition", or "Very Little competition".

You cannot get off the "blaming the packers for profitting" can you SH.

WHO the hell could blame them. They just did it.

Is it blaming to state a fact.

Agman's fact about packers helping the situation by killing full throttle is as much fact as the tooth fairy. Why don't you question him on his fact.

The fact is the packers took full advantage of the lack of competition due to the closed border.

That statement is not blaming you imbicile, it is simply the truth.

Sorry I don't keep up with your cut and paste garbage SH, you are far more astute at it than I am.

Listening to your BS about comprehension makes me want to drink SH. If you understand the situation and speak of it so often, why play the game of supplying your own theory of what happened after the river ran over with salmon. Mine is truth, not blame. Yours is "DEFEND the Packer Kings at all cost.

 

[Anonymous]

Randy: "Then why do you go on and on about competition driving price in Canada SH?"

Once again, your reading comprehension problem rears it's head again.

Where did I go on and on about competition driving price IN CANADA????

I said Cargill and Tyson are in competition with eachother. If that was not the case, your prices would be lower than they are.

Randy: "Is it blaming to state a fact."

I have already shown you the definition of "blame". Why would you ask for the definition again?

Ooops, forgot! Reading comprehension problem.

Randy: "Agman's fact about packers helping the situation by killing full throttle is as much fact as the tooth fairy. Why don't you question him on his fact."

Why should I?

You are the one having a problem with what he said not me. Agman has proven the accuracy of his information over and over. I don't need to challenge it.

Randy: "The fact is the packers took full advantage of the lack of competition due to the closed border."

Unbelievable!

I just dedicated an entire post to this very issue and presented 9 examples of where I stated that very same thing and somehow you still think I don't understand it.

Excuse me while I bang my head against the wall!

Randy: "If you understand the situation and speak of it so often, why play the game of supplying your own theory of what happened after the river ran over with salmon."

My own theory?

You and I have stated the exact same thing. I stated it 9 times in this thread and presented those statements in a single post and you still think I don't understand the situation?

Canada had more cattle than slaughter capacity clearly placing the leverage in the packers favor. There, that must be about the 12th time I stated it.

Ross Perot: "Are you getting this? Am I going too fast?"


This issue is really simple. BSE was discovered in Canada. USDA closed the border based on food safety concerns and R-CALF filed an injunction to keep the border closed based on import concerns. The border should be open now but it's not. The packers in Canada were faced with a situation of more cattle than slaughter capacity which allowed them to pay less for cattle. What's not to understand?

My point is that it does no good to bitch about the packers taking advantage of this situation when they did nothing illegal. Nothing that you would not have done if you were in their shoes.

Your point is that you have been hit hard financially and you feel you have the right to blame packers for it.

You see value in blaming packers and I don't!

That's where we differ!



The part of this issue you are dead wrong about is assuming that the packers wanted the border closed and are working to keep it closed. The opposite is true. Not only do they want the border opened to live cattle under 30 months, they want the border opened to slaughter cattle as well and even filed suit accordingly. You will not be able to argue this point because I am right and you are wrong. I presented the facts to support my position (AMI's suit against USDA, closed plants in Washington) and you presented nothing more than a conspiracy theory.


~SH~

 

[rkaiser]

Good - I am glad you agree with me that Agman story about packers helping the producers is crap. They took full advantage, and that is truth not blame.

Now you must dig into the archives again SH and show me where I said the Cargill and Tyson tried to keep the border closed. They did not try, they simply did not try to open it. Your talk about the AMI has nothing to do with the thoughts of Tyson and Cargill in particular.

Facts are fine, the packing industry wants the border open. When Cargill and Tyson worked very hard to get that job done for boxed beef WA LA, border opened in weeks. There are only two American packers in Canada SH, not the whole NMA or AMI.

Hows your understanding so far?

We always talk legal. The packers do nothing illegal. Like I have said a thousand times laws are made every day. You would think that after a tradgedy like this going on for two bloody years, some kind of law could be changed. In fact, the whole border closure is illegal in the first place according to NAFTA but our spineless government has never had the guts to challenge the US on it. If I ever suggest the idea of laws being changed to stop this BS, I am labeled a socialist, or once again (your favourite) a blamer.

Do you really think that those people in both our countries see the unfairness in the industry that is segmenting beef from cattle, packers from producers. Is this healthy? The math is simple, millions lost by producers, millions gained by packers, millions paid by taxpayers. Someone with some guts has to stand up to this crap without the scapegoat Rcalf excuse and make some policy changes RIGHT NOW. Yah that's right, I don't beleive that Rcalf has the kind of power to hold back the US government if the US government wanted it done. Once again, let's look at the speed behind the opening to boxed beef.

There you go hero, a whole days work for you tearing all of those STATEMENTS apart.

Only took me a minute and a half.(might even have some spelling errors) How long does it take you to prove your superiority every day?

 

[Anonymous]

Randy: "Good - I am glad you agree with me that Agman story about packers helping the producers is crap. They took full advantage, and that is truth not blame."

You are wrong again!

The packers did increase their plant flows to account for this situation of more cattle than slaughter capacity. Had they slowed chain speeds that would have prolonged their advantage. They chose to help the situation by moving tonnage.

They did not take "FULL" advantage or they would have prolonged the agony by stalling the process.

Randy: "Now you must dig into the archives again SH and show me where I said the Cargill and Tyson tried to keep the border closed. They did not try, they simply did not try to open it."

That is not true either.

They opposed the prolonged closing of the Canadian border and voiced their opposition in their briefings to the court.

Randy: "Your talk about the AMI has nothing to do with the thoughts of Tyson and Cargill in particular."

Wrong again!

Tyson and Cargill have a large influence in the AMI.

Randy: "Facts are fine, the packing industry wants the border open."

Oh, so now they do want the border opened.

Make up your mind!

Randy: " Hows your understanding so far?"

I understand your lack of understanding completely.

Randy: "You would think that after a tradgedy like this going on for two bloody years, some kind of law could be changed. In fact, the whole border closure is illegal in the first place according to NAFTA but our spineless government has never had the guts to challenge the US on it. If I ever suggest the idea of laws being changed to stop this BS, I am labeled a socialist, or once again (your favourite) a blamer.'

Not in this case.

I agree, your government should challenge the U.S. on NAFTA and sue R-CULT for their lying deceptive ways.

I am ashamed that these hypocrites claim to represent our industry!

In this statement, you are discussing potential solutions rather than just complaining.

The issue here is the closed border, not the packing industry taking advantage of the situation.

Randy: "Do you really think that those people in both our countries see the unfairness in the industry that is segmenting beef from cattle, packers from producers. Is this healthy?"

No, segmentation is not healthy and that's just what R-CULT/LMA/OCM etc. etc. want to maintain. They oppose vertical integration yet they cuss segmentation. One more example of their never ending hypocrisy.

What's healthy is for producer, feeder, processor, and retailer to all work together towards the betterment of the beef industry. Even healthier is for producers to have a vested financial interest from pasture to plate.

Randy: "Someone with some guts has to stand up to this crap without the scapegoat Rcalf excuse and make some policy changes RIGHT NOW."

R-CALF is not a "scapegoat". R-CALF's injunction based on lies about the safety of your beef is precisely why the border remains closed to live cattle and precisely why the packers have the leverage they do.

Randy: "I don't beleive that Rcalf has the kind of power to hold back the US government if the US government wanted it done."

They filed their briefing in court and the judge agreed to a hearing.

Randy: "Once again, let's look at the speed behind the opening to boxed beef."

You bring up a good point here Randy. Why did the USDA open boxed beef so quickly but not live cattle? I believe it's because R-CALF's suit addressed live cattle rather than boxed beef. R-CALF would probably view that as their screw up but remember, they claim to be in the "cattle industry" rather than the "beef industry" so it's only natural that they would be less concerned about Canadian boxed beef imports than live cattle imports.

They are not known for being the sharpest pencils in the drawer.


~SH~

 

[Sandhusker]

SH, "They are not known for being the sharpest pencils in the drawer. "

Really? Is that why their membership is growing leaps and bounds? :lol: :lol: :lol: Is that why they're 2-0 against the USDA in court? :lol:

Nope, not very sharp! :lol: :lol: :roll:

 

[Tam]

SH, "They are not known for being the sharpest pencils in the drawer. "

Really? Is that why their membership is growing leaps and bounds? :lol: :lol: :lol: Is that why they're 2-0 against the USDA in court? :lol:

Nope, not very sharp! :lol: :lol: :roll:

Oh they are sharp alright they know just what court to file in don't they Sandhusker. :wink:

 

[Sandhusker]

SH, "They are not known for being the sharpest pencils in the drawer. "

Really? Is that why their membership is growing leaps and bounds? :lol: :lol: :lol: Is that why they're 2-0 against the USDA in court? :lol:

Nope, not very sharp! :lol: :lol: :roll:

Oh they are sharp alright they know just what court to file in don't they Sandhusker. :wink:

Why file across the country when you hae a courthouse across the street? Do you get your groceries close to home or do you go to New Brunswick?

 

[Tam]

SH, "They are not known for being the sharpest pencils in the drawer. "

Really? Is that why their membership is growing leaps and bounds? :lol: :lol: :lol: Is that why they're 2-0 against the USDA in court? :lol:

Nope, not very sharp! :lol: :lol: :roll:

Oh they are sharp alright they know just what court to file in don't they Sandhusker. :wink:

Why file across the country when you hae a courthouse across the street? Do you get your groceries close to home or do you go to New Brunswick?

Well Sandhusker I go where I can get the best deal if the guy in town treats me right and I get what I want I stick with him but if I don't get what I want or need I will go to another town to buy. So looks to me as if R-CALF is getting the what they want or they too but be filing in another court too!!!

 

[the chief]

Quote: So looks to me as if R-CALF is getting the what they want or they too but be filing in another court too!!!

Could you say that in English? :? :wink:

 

[Anonymous]

Chief:

"Could you say that in English?"

Hahaha!

Tam you need to proof read! Don't give Haymaker one more reason to like you. Hahaha!

Sandman: "Really? Is that why their membership is growing leaps and bounds?"

No, their membership is growing because they have the Livestock Marketing Police doing their fundraising and spreading their lies.

Their lies have reached droves of people and the truth of those same issues hasn't.

That will change in time!

Sandman: "Is that why they're 2-0 against the USDA in court?"

They lost their dumping case against Canada.
They lost in Pickett.
Their supporters lost their checkoff challenge.
They will lose their court case to keep the Canadian border closed.


I repeat, they're not the sharpest pencils in the drawer.


Who else would be ignorant enough to call Canadian beef unsafe when we have taken the very same BSE precautionary measures Canada has?

Who else would be ignorant enough to suggest that we have the safest beef in the world one day and suggest USDA hasn't gone far enough to assure the safety of our beef the next?

Only R-CULT!

As far as my comment about R-CULT "pointing a loaded gun to our head", if NCBA and USDA were not there to tell the media the truth about BSE and the media quoted R-CULT's lies about Canadian beef. We would be in a world of hurt.

Have you asked Dennis McDonald if R-CULT members will continue to sell slaughter cows since he said that we should stop processing slaughter cows in the U.S. if we had a domestic case of BSE. I bet he can't backpeddle fast enough.

Is R-CULT going to suggest that Japan wait 7 years to import beef from the U.S. since that is the presidence they want with Canada?

They'd be that stupid!


~SH~

 

[Sandhusker]

SH, "No, their membership is growing because they have the Livestock Marketing Police doing their fundraising and spreading their lies. Their lies have reached droves of people and the truth of those same issues hasn't.


You must have a pretty low opinion of US cattlemen's intelligence if you think they can't sort out a lie.

SH, "They lost their dumping case against Canada.
They lost in Pickett.
Their supporters lost their checkoff challenge.
They will lose their court case to keep the Canadian border closed. "

They WON the dumping case - just couldn't pencil the damages.
They were not a plaintiff in Pickett
"Their supporters" are not THEM.
They've won the case so far (not to mention the case the USDA conceeded on even before going to court)!

Do you have any other hallucinations you would like to share?

SH, "Who else would be ignorant enough to call Canadian beef unsafe when we have taken the very same BSE precautionary measures Canada has?"

Is their beef safe? Is our beef safe? We don't KNOW. Neither country is testing enough to satisfy the guy who won the Nobel!

SH, "Who else would be ignorant enough to suggest that we have the safest beef in the world one day and suggest USDA hasn't gone far enough to assure the safety of our beef the next?"

So you feel the USDA is doing all they can to assure the safety of our beef? Phyllis Fong didn't think so......

SH, "As far as my comment about R-CULT "pointing a loaded gun to our head", if NCBA and USDA were not there to tell the media the truth about BSE and the media quoted R-CULT's lies about Canadian beef. We would be in a world of hurt."

So, did the USDA tell the truth when they said that Texas cow was BSE negetive?

SH, "Have you asked Dennis McDonald if R-CULT members will continue to sell slaughter cows since he said that we should stop processing slaughter cows in the U.S. if we had a domestic case of BSE. I bet he can't backpeddle fast enough. "

Would you care to prove he said that? Is that CONVIENT for you? :lol:

SH, "Is R-CULT going to suggest that Japan wait 7 years to import beef from the U.S. since that is the presidence they want with Canada?"

Spinmeister, you know damn well that comment was made regarding Canadian exports to the US. Is the NCBA going to continue to promote the failed Japan policy of the USDA? :roll:

Speaking of the NCBA, are you still spouting the BS that they are "producer driven"?


~SH~

 

[Anonymous]

Sandman: "You must have a pretty low opinion of US cattlemen's intelligence if you think they can't sort out a lie."

Nobody can sort out a lie if they are never presented with the truth.

Anytime your heros are in a true debate of the facts they get their heads handed to them.

Sandman: "Is their beef safe? Is our beef safe? We don't KNOW. Neither country is testing enough to satisfy the guy who won the Nobel!"

WHAT???

Your organization said and I quote, "we have the safest beef in the world". Now you are saying they don't know?

WHICH WAY IS IT???????

Sandman: "So you feel the USDA is doing all they can to assure the safety of our beef? Phyllis Fong didn't think so...... "

You bet! Phyliss Fong, based on pressure from BSE "fear mongerers" tested a previous "inconclusive positive" that now became a "weak positive" with a more sensitive test.

The CME yawned and the animal never made it into the food chain AND WAS BORN PREVIOUS TO THE FEED BAN!

YOUR POINT ???????????????? As if you actually had one.

Sandman: " So, did the USDA tell the truth when they said that Texas cow was BSE negetive?"

The Texas cow was BSE negative with the test that was used. That was the truth based on that test.

Sandman: "Would you care to prove he said that?"

Hahaha! How predictable!

As always, question whatever doesn't support your bias.

It was reported in a ND paper that Dennis McDonald made that statement and the audience reacted negatively to his statement. Now why would the audience react negatively if he never said it? I suppose the reporter made that up too huh?

Hahaha!

So typical!

It looks as if we are going to have to record everything your heros say so they and their clones can't deny saying it later.

Leo said Canada is still processing downer cows. Why aren't you asking for proof of that? What's your defense for that lie?

Sandman: "Spinmeister, you know damn well that comment was made regarding Canadian exports to the US."

Of course I know it was made regarding Canadian exports to the U.S., BASED ON THE FACT THAT CANADA HAD BSE IN THEIR DOMESTIC HERD.. Now that we have a case of BSE in our domestic herd, why wouldn't those same rules apply to the U.S. for Japan you damn hypocrite?????

QUIT DIVERTING!!!!!

Sandman: "Is the NCBA going to continue to promote the failed Japan policy of the USDA?"

I thought R-CALF said we have the safest beef in the world and we can look our consumers right in the eye and tell them our beef is safe due to the firewalls we have in place.

WHICH WAY IS IT SANDMAN???????

The fact that we have not found a positive animal born since the feedban proves that USDA's policy is working.

Sandman: "Speaking of the NCBA, are you still spouting the BS that they are "producer driven"?"

No reason to "spout" it because it's a fact. I understand that you cannot relate to NCBA policy since they are not driven by blame like your beloved, hypocritical R-CULT is.



~SH~

 

[Bill]

You must have a pretty low opinion of US cattlemen's intelligence if you think they can't sort out a lie.

Valid statement Sandhusker and that is why Canadian producers are so ticked with R-Calf. For what ever reason these "intelligent" American cattlemen and women have been duped into believeing some of the most outrageous lies. I guess they are simply focussed on believing what they want to even if it makes no sense at all. :roll:

An example is R-Calf saying as late as June 24/05 that downers are still entering the Canadian food supply. Utter BS :!: :!: :!: A person with any hint of intelligence knows this is false.