Update for Sandhusker

[Econ101]

OT,

You said Dittmer was a paid lobbyist and now you are asking what his funding sources were.

How can he be a paid lobbyist if you don't even know what his source of funding is?

Go ahead, I'll give you time to pull your pants back up.



~SH~

I guess he's just working for free.

And with few resources. Sorry- I thought you were talking about SH.

 

[Anonymous]

Nobody can prove that Dittmer is a "paid lobbyist". Just as I figured. More cheap talk!

Deny, Discredit, Deceive, Divert!

Same-o, same-o!


~SH~

 

[Econ101]

Nobody can prove that Dittmer is a "paid lobbyist". Just as I figured. More cheap talk!

Deny, Discredit, Deceive, Divert!

Same-o, same-o!


~SH~

Are you unequivocably saying he is not? Do you know that he is not getting ANY resources from anyone else? Can YOU prove it?

"Deny, Discredit, Deceive, Divert!

Same-o, same-o!"

 

[Sandhusker]

Nobody can prove that Dittmer is a "paid lobbyist". Just as I figured. More cheap talk!

Deny, Discredit, Deceive, Divert!

Same-o, same-o!


~SH~

I suppose his "foundation" is just a hobby?

 

[Anonymous]

Who is Dittmer a lobbyist for Sandbag?

Who is paying him?

Stop the illusion and bring the facts! Talk is cheap!



~SH~

 

[Sandhusker]

Who is Dittmer a lobbyist for Sandbag?

Who is paying him?

Stop the illusion and bring the facts! Talk is cheap!



~SH~

You'd make a pretty poor detective, SH. Unless I could provide a cancelled check, you would refuse anything I brought. Figure it out; instead of following his mission statement, he just attacks R-CALF with wild accusations. He is not as advertised. Who might profit from discrediting R-CALF? That's where you start looking.

 

[Jason]

Who is Dittmer a lobbyist for Sandbag?

Who is paying him?

Stop the illusion and bring the facts! Talk is cheap!



~SH~

You'd make a pretty poor detective, SH. Unless I could provide a cancelled check, you would refuse anything I brought. Figure it out; instead of following his mission statement, he just attacks R-CALF with wild accusations. He is not as advertised. Who might profit from discrediting R-CALF? That's where you start looking.

You started the standard of financials for proof Sandhusker.

Who would benefit by discrediting R-half? Every person in the beef industry. Leaves a lot of contributors for Dittmer.

 

[Sandhusker]

Who is Dittmer a lobbyist for Sandbag?

Who is paying him?

Stop the illusion and bring the facts! Talk is cheap!



~SH~

You'd make a pretty poor detective, SH. Unless I could provide a cancelled check, you would refuse anything I brought. Figure it out; instead of following his mission statement, he just attacks R-CALF with wild accusations. He is not as advertised. Who might profit from discrediting R-CALF? That's where you start looking.

You started the standard of financials for proof Sandhusker.

Who would benefit by discrediting R-half? Every person in the beef industry. Leaves a lot of contributors for Dittmer.

Well then, I guess he's working for all of us. What a kind soul that he would donate his time and resources for a charitable project.

Even wonder why he doesn't follow his mission statement?

 

[Tam]

Why is it it always comes back to who funds AFF? :roll:
Sandhusker you said he attacks R-CALF with Wild accusations tell us what was wild about what he said in the article.
He wrote

activists inside the industry joined with radical activist outside the industry to make the issue a political football.

Tell us Sandhusker did Leo no stand hand in hand with radical activist from outside of the industry and hold a press conference. I think his words were R-CALF is working with these groups as they get more attention from the media. Did R-CALF not ask everyone who would listen to get their Congressmen involved. You can't tell me that alot of backroom POLITICAL deals weren't made because of this border.
He wrote

Attacks on consumer confidence in beef by fractions within the industry, led by R-CALF, OCM,WORC, and others have left scars that won't soon be forgotten

We all know how fast an R-CALFer can forget but there is a big part of the industry that will remember the damage you tried to inflict on consumer confidence.
He wrote

Courts intruded on world trade in a way highly visible to the average feeder and rancher, as well as consumer

Did R-CALF not take the USDA to court over international trade matters and did the media not pick up on it? Even Japanese consumers were paying attention to the court case.
He wrote

The USDA took the lead in establishing such rules R-CALF and its allies portrayed this updating of standards as weakening standards

Well didn't they? The OIE told the USDA to take a leadership roll in establishing import/export rules that would not punish countries that were doing their utmost to maintain the health and welfare of their herds and consumers. R-CALF can't see the USDA is only doing what they were told to do even though the OIE came out with a statement saying that R-CALF was misreading the guidelines and they were wrong. R-CALF chooses not to listen because it doesn't fit their protectioist agenda of no trade is good trade.
He wrote

Luckily for cattlemen, consumers were satisfied be scientific evidence and their confidence in the USDA, and largely ignored the "threat"

Just try deny the cattlemen were lucky that the consumers ignored all the radical activist (R-CALF included) crap because if they hadn't once BSE was found in the US your cattle industry would have been dead because of statements like All Beef coming from a country affected by BSE is tainted and a genuine risk of death if eaten. Remember who said this? Wasn't it a FEDERAL COURT JUDGE IN HIS RULING THAT INTRUDED ON WORLD TRADE AFAIRS.
He wrote

New political and activist emerged that stretched the imaginations of many cattlemen. Long-time anti-beef activist groups, allied with trade unions and radical cattlemen's groups were a phenomenon mainstream cattlemen found shocking and counterintuitive

Sorry R-CALF but if the shoe fits I guess he is talking about you. Tell us just how many of you thought you would ever see a beef organization and a radical anti beef group stand hand in hand at a news conference and buying ads together, trying to bring down a beef industry. Tell me that didn't boogle your mind :roll:
He wrote

The spectacle of a cattlemens group defying established and proven science, embracing speculative and unreplicated experimentation and extrapolation, and serving as a credibility prop for avowed enemies of the beef industry, was unimaginable to mainstream cattlemen.

Sorry boys but you did shock the mainstream with your alliance with the enemy and the evidence you dug up.
He wrote

Whether the radical cattlemen are serving as allies, credibility props or just mouthpieces, the effect to the public is to question the foundations of mainstream agriculture.

Leo said himself R-CALF was alining themselves with these groups because of the media attention they recieve and he wanted to get the R-CALF message out to as many consumers as possible. I guess he just didn't see that it would be giving them credibility in the next media blitz about how bad Beef is for you and why you shouldn't eat beef.
He wrote

These groups oppose trade among nations

Wasn't it Leo or Bill that said the US beef industry can do just fine without export trade as long as we are not importing?

Free Trade has caused splits in the industry and caused strong alliances between some other parts of the North American beef industry.
As far as the comments like " There are those who constantly work counter to demands of the consumer marketplace. their message is always, Slow down, go back, don't change what we know". Who was it that keeps saying We don't want to burden the producer with the cost of a national ID system, our old hot brand system (in some of the states) will do the job of a national ID system.
Then there is "The Price of inaction can be great--in foregone dollars as well as industry structure." How much more are you willing to loose before you get your act together and get caught up with the rest of the modern beef industries

Just maybe you should stop worrying about who pays Dittmers bills and worry more about the facts he brings to light. The facts are the US beef industry doesn't need a fraction of the industry siding with anti beef groups giving them credibility in their fight against the industry. What it does need is to work together to get caught up with the rest of the beef producing world or you will be having a hard time selling beef to your domestic markets. When and if you ever get M"COOL, the consumers will know that it is US beef but when and where in the US was it born is what they really want to know. The industry is changing and if you are one of the "Slow down don't burden me with that cost just label the imports" crowd you better get out of the way as the steamroller is coming.

 

[Sandhusker]

Tam, you make it hard to reply when you write a disertation. Maybe a good place to start is all these radical anti-beef activist groups Dittmer describes. I'd certainly put PETA as radical anti-beef - but the rest? I think the "foundation" is using pretty wide latidutes in "their" definitions.

 

[mrj]

Tam, you make it hard to reply when you write a disertation. Maybe a good place to start is all these radical anti-beef activist groups Dittmer describes. I'd certainly put PETA as radical anti-beef - but the rest? I think the "foundation" is using pretty wide latidutes in "their" definitions.

Sandhusker, you and your cohorts can keep your heads in the sand if you choose over which groups are benign toward beef and which are truly out to stop animal agriculture.

Food industry, including agriculture organizations, have long ago found connections and inter-woven directors, finance, and actual control of many activist organizations by a relatively small group of people. This pre-dates Dittmer. It has been at least ten years ago that I first heard this.

MRJ

 

[Anonymous]

Sandbag: "You'd make a pretty poor detective, SH. Unless I could provide a cancelled check, you would refuse anything I brought. Figure it out; instead of following his mission statement, he just attacks R-CALF with wild accusations. He is not as advertised. Who might profit from discrediting R-CALF? That's where you start looking."

DIVERSION!

I'll take that as your admission that you can't back the "paid lobbyist" bullsh*t statement.


Great Post Tam!

Nice to have you back!


~SH~

 

[Sandhusker]

Tam, you make it hard to reply when you write a disertation. Maybe a good place to start is all these radical anti-beef activist groups Dittmer describes. I'd certainly put PETA as radical anti-beef - but the rest? I think the "foundation" is using pretty wide latidutes in "their" definitions.

Sandhusker, you and your cohorts can keep your heads in the sand if you choose over which groups are benign toward beef and which are truly out to stop animal agriculture.

Food industry, including agriculture organizations, have long ago found connections and inter-woven directors, finance, and actual control of many activist organizations by a relatively small group of people. This pre-dates Dittmer. It has been at least ten years ago that I first heard this.

MRJ

MRJ, I just got off "Consumer Union's" website. If they were a "radical anti-beef" orginazation, I would think I would find all the articles on beef to be "Do not eat". That's not what I found. Their articles were about beef SAFETY, not ABSTINANCE. Too many people hear paid hacks like Dittmer say Consumer Union is anti-beef and then parrot that statement without checking for themselves. I just checked for myself, and I suggest you, Tam, and SH do the same.

 

[Anonymous]

Sandbag,

Are you suggesting that R-CULT's "live for the moment" allies of Consumer Federation of America, Consumers Union, and Public Citizen have never taken a position that was against eating beef?

Yes or no?


~SH~

 

[Econ101]

Sandbag,

Are you suggesting that R-CULT's "live for the moment" allies of Consumer Federation of America, Consumers Union, and Public Citizen have never taken a position that was against eating beef?

Yes or no?


~SH~

Never, always and all are words for arguers like you, SH. Why don't you update your knowledge of these groups? Are you saying that Dittmer never got any money from the packers or their minions?

 

[Sandhusker]

Sandbag,

Are you suggesting that R-CULT's "live for the moment" allies of Consumer Federation of America, Consumers Union, and Public Citizen have never taken a position that was against eating beef?

Yes or no?


~SH~

I'm saying I looked thru Consumer Union's site and saw nothing whatsoever that would merit the label you and Dittmer have placed on them.

 

[mrj]

Sandbag,

Are you suggesting that R-CULT's "live for the moment" allies of Consumer Federation of America, Consumers Union, and Public Citizen have never taken a position that was against eating beef?

Yes or no?


~SH~

I'm saying I looked thru Consumer Union's site and saw nothing whatsoever that would merit the label you and Dittmer have placed on them.

I did look through the CU site and did a search on "stories" by Mike Hansen. Turned up 10, all surely heartwarming to an R-CALF indoctrinated person........and carrying serious warning flags to anyone who does not buy into the isolationist trade policies they espouse.

Stories by Hansen fit very well with the attempts to discredit USDA, modern current beef safety practices, testing and re-testing "mad cow" suspects, and releasing data on cattle tested for mad-cow.

BTW, you tried to make it appear that I said CU is a "radical anti-beef organization". I did NOT say that. I said that many of the activist organizations are interconnected (via directors, funding sources and more), and that they have taken some anti-beef stands.

I would say that publicly going to consumers with CU complaints against USDA, using inflammatory language to induce fears into consumers in order to entice consumers into supporting their position against USDA, should be considered quite extreme activism. They lead us to believe USDA is NOT following the best science re. BSE. Maybe you believe that, but I, along with many others do not.

MRJ

MRJ

 

[Sandhusker]

Sandbag,

Are you suggesting that R-CULT's "live for the moment" allies of Consumer Federation of America, Consumers Union, and Public Citizen have never taken a position that was against eating beef?

Yes or no?


~SH~

I'm saying I looked thru Consumer Union's site and saw nothing whatsoever that would merit the label you and Dittmer have placed on them.

I did look through the CU site and did a search on "stories" by Mike Hansen. Turned up 10, all surely heartwarming to an R-CALF indoctrinated person........and carrying serious warning flags to anyone who does not buy into the isolationist trade policies they espouse.

Stories by Hansen fit very well with the attempts to discredit USDA, modern current beef safety practices, testing and re-testing "mad cow" suspects, and releasing data on cattle tested for mad-cow.

MRJ

Was his message to not eat beef?

 

[mrj]

I'm saying I looked thru Consumer Union's site and saw nothing whatsoever that would merit the label you and Dittmer have placed on them.

I did look through the CU site and did a search on "stories" by Mike Hansen. Turned up 10, all surely heartwarming to an R-CALF indoctrinated person........and carrying serious warning flags to anyone who does not buy into the isolationist trade policies they espouse.

Stories by Hansen fit very well with the attempts to discredit USDA, modern current beef safety practices, testing and re-testing "mad cow" suspects, and releasing data on cattle tested for mad-cow.

MRJ

Was his message to not eat beef?

Do you believe that to send a message to not eat beef, one has to directly say that? I think the message was to make people fearful that beef probably is not safe and that USDA must not care. Subtlety and insinuation can be used to carry an unspoken message, IMO.

MRJ

 

[Econ101]

I did look through the CU site and did a search on "stories" by Mike Hansen. Turned up 10, all surely heartwarming to an R-CALF indoctrinated person........and carrying serious warning flags to anyone who does not buy into the isolationist trade policies they espouse.

Stories by Hansen fit very well with the attempts to discredit USDA, modern current beef safety practices, testing and re-testing "mad cow" suspects, and releasing data on cattle tested for mad-cow.

MRJ

Was his message to not eat beef?

Do you believe that to send a message to not eat beef, one has to directly say that? I think the message was to make people fearful that beef probably is not safe and that USDA must not care. Subtlety and insinuation can be used to carry an unspoken message, IMO.

MRJ

So now inuendos are more powerful than a packed USDA? You really are funny, MRJ. Fact is, no one should be eating a downer cow and without groups calling for things like that they would still happen.