US Producers Concerned Over Canadian Beef

[Sandhusker]

You still won't come out of your comfort zone and think for yourself, will you, Tam. All you have is "these guys said". Is that how you run your life, based on what some guy said? You make all your decisions based on what some guys said? I can see why the Canadian cattle industry is in the shape it's in with "leadership" like yours.

You just hole up and call me "brainwashed by R-CALF." I offered an arguement in my own words - not R-CALF's. I came up with timely examples to try to draw you a picture. But all you have is "these guys said".

Lambs get led to the slaughter, Tam.

 

[Tam]

You still won't come out of your comfort zone and think for yourself, will you, Tam. All you have is "these guys said". Is that how you run your life, based on what some guy said? You make all your decisions based on what some guys said? I can see why the Canadian cattle industry is in the shape it's in with "leadership" like yours.

You just hole up and call me "brainwashed by R-CALF." I offered an arguement in my own words - not R-CALF's. I came up with timely examples to try to draw you a picture. But all you have is "these guys said".

Lambs get led to the slaughter, Tam.

I'm not sure you want me out of my comfort zone Sandhusker, as I just may tell you exactly what I think of you, your so called beef organization and your leaders in words that would certainly be edited by the monitor of the site. :wink:

Answer this Sandhusker how low would be low enough for you and R-CALF?
No where in the AHPA did the Congress put restrictions on the USDA to have to guarantee no risk from imports, but that is what you expect them to do isn't it?
No body in their right mind can expect The USDA or anyone else to guarantee no risk but then you and R-CALF are not in your right minds are you?
No matter how low the USDA said the risk was someone (namely you and R-CALF) would have some lame reason to claim that wasn't good enough.
Maybe that is why the Congress left it up to the discretion of the USDA to decide how low is low enough, instead of a Federal Judge that uses incorrect legal standards to grant unwarrented injunctions to a beef organization thats only purpose for exsistance is to stop trade by any means possible. Which was proven to be true by this and the other failed attempts in shutting down trade.

I think you are forgetting one thing as you seem to do quite often, is the fact the US has BSE and the rules of your imports and the rate of how low is low enough to trade is also rating your chances of ever trading in beef again.
How low is low enough when it comes to the US exports? Tell us how low is the US industry's risk rating in your OPINION? As you see Sandhusker all the risk rating is based on is an educated opinion nothing more but in your case much LESS.

BTW You have BSE in your native herd yet R-CALF claims to have the SAFEST Beef in the World raised to the HIGHEST Standards in the World.
How do they rate the Safest Sandhusker? How do they rate Highest? I bet we can find lots of countries besides Canada that could take R-CALF's claim to the Safest Beef in the World raised to the Highest standards in the World to task and win their arguments hands down with one look at your standards and the fact you have BSE. R-CALFs claims to Safest and Highest are also based on OPINIONS and not very fact based OPINIONS. Hell R-CALF themselves can prove their own statement of the Highest Standards in the World wrong CAN'T THEY? So holding the USDA or anyone else to qualify how Low is LOW is a bit hypocritical isn't it?

I have some questions an not one of you R-CALFers have been able to give me any acceptable answers so I demand you Sandhusker answer them to my satisfaction.
1. If our herd is as infected with BSE as R-CALF claims then why is it that only one of the millions of cattle that we have exported to the US has ever been found to be positive by the US?
2. If they are just being missed and processed then why haven't we seen a positive cow with the same strain of BSE within your native herd?
3. If our feed is as contaminated as R-CALF claims and our feed has been exported to the US for decades why haven't we seen any BSE positive US cattle resulting from them eating the same contaminated feed for again DECADES?
The answers to these questions could lead one to believe that Canada's herd is as low risk as the USDA estimates it is and could certainly blow holes in R-CALF's theory that we are a higher risk country. Are you willing to step out of R-CALF's bright lights and attempt to answer my questions? :wink:

 

[Sandhusker]

You avoided the question yet again. You try to change the topic but I'm not biting. You still can't tell me why "low" is not arbitrary in your own words and thoughts. Cebull was right, the Ninth got it wrong.

 

[Tam]

You avoided the question yet again. You try to change the topic but I'm not biting. You still can't tell me why "low" is not arbitrary in your own words and thoughts. Cebull was right, the Ninth got it wrong.

Low is totally arbitrary which mean to be left up to the discretion of, in this case, the USDA not R-CALF and their bought off Judge. If it was left up to R-CALF no matter how low Canada proved themselves to be, it would NOT BE LOW ENOUGH as they have proven in the past all they really care about is shutting down trade and they will use any means especially BSE to it.
Again No where does it say the USDA has to guarantee NO risk . It was left up to "the USDA's discretion" by the CONGRESS when the AHPA was enacted in 2002 to determine how low is low enough.
IF the US Congress backtracks and expects the USDA to guarantee no risk on imports, then I would suggest they get a handle on those Congressmen that are threatening Japan and others with Trade sanctions because of your ban exports as the USDA can't guarantee NO RISK FROM YOUR BSE BEEF EITHER.

Now according to the Ninths ruling if you had cared enough to read it they explain everything. Where Cebull got it wrong was the fact he misread the AHPA by somehow missing the word "MAY" which in the Ninths eyes and most other normal minded people, means that the USDA was given discretion and flexibility on making their decisions when dealing with new and emerging diseases. That is one of the many reasons why the Ninth found there was not bases for the APA grounds cited by Cebull.
THE USDA HAD THE DISCRETION GRANTED BY THE CONGRESS IN THE AHPA TO MAKE THE ARBITRARY CALL AND THEY DID JUST THAT, AFTER THEY LOOKED AT ALL THE FACTS SURROUNDING THE BSE IN CANADA. They didn't just look at the odd puzzle piece like you and R-CALF like to do, they looked at the whole NORTH AMERICAN picture and under the powers given to them by the Congress in the AHPA they made their decision and wrote the Final Rule accordingly. So yes Low is arbitrary Sandhusker it just so happens it is lucky for the North American Beef Industries it is not up to R-CALF's discretion though. :wink:

Now answer my questions.

 

[Sandhusker]

Tam, "Low is totally arbitrary....."

Thank you for finally admitting it. You just agreed with R-CALF and Judge Cebull and disagreed with the Ninth. Why then are you still siding with the Ninth?

Now to answer your questions;
I don't know of anywhere that it says USDA has to guarantee no risk. I doubt they have been given that mandate as it would be impossible to fulfill. However, they do have the directive to keep diseases out of the US and they have admitted that opening the border to Canada will allow entry of BSE positive cases. Therefore, their decision should be made for them.

Tam, "1. If our herd is as infected with BSE as R-CALF claims then why is it that only one of the millions of cattle that we have exported to the US has ever been found to be positive by the US?"

As R-CALF claims? :shock: Tam, there have been 8 verified cases! What R-CALF "claims" is the undisputed truth! I think the reason that we haven't found more is because the percentage of Canadian origin cattle are a small minority in our herd and the USDA doesn't want to test.

Tam, "2. If they are just being missed and processed then why haven't we seen a positive cow with the same strain of BSE within your native herd?

Same reasons as above.

Tam, "3. If our feed is as contaminated as R-CALF claims and our feed has been exported to the US for decades why haven't we seen any BSE positive US cattle resulting from them eating the same contaminated feed for again DECADES?

Again, as R-CALF claims? :lol: How many cases have you had? Where does BSE come from? All of your feed mills are not exporting to the US.

 

[Anonymous]

Tam,

Your playing his game. Stick to your questions and keep asking them. Don't go down his road and address something as meaningless as................

Sandcheska: "Judge Cebull said the USDA's use of the word "low" was arbitrary. The Ninth said it wasn't. Why was the Ninth correct and Cebull wrong - YOUR OWN THOUGHTS."

Talk about being desperate when you have to split the hairs on the definition of "low".


Then this statement shows again just how much he has to defend his position..................

Little Sandcheska: "The Ninth court is the same outfit who ruled "Under God" had to be removed from the Pledge of Allegance. They also ruled that parents had no right to question what school boards decided to teach their own children. Here they are backing the efforts of the same bunch who said your feed ban became effective in March, 1999. You'll have to excuse me for not swallowing all they say hook, line, and sinker."

THOSE WHO CAN'T DEBATE DISCREDIT!

That's all he ever has. The master of "ILLUSION" creating the "ILLUSION" that the 9th was wrong.

Want to stop this crap?

Keep asking him where 40 judges were wrong in their ruling and R-CULT and Cebull were right. He'll keep dancing and diverting because he couldn't support his R-CULT cloned views if his life depended on it.

R-CULT had no justification to shut the border down and they flip flopped like a fish in a boat when we had a native case of bse.

Don't let him lead you around Tam. Keep asking the same questions until he answers them or until his diversion is so obvious that you've made your point.


~SH~

 

[Anonymous]

Sandcheska: "However, they do have the directive to keep diseases out of the US and they have admitted that opening the border to Canada will allow entry of BSE positive cases."

Show me where USDA has stated that opening the border to Canada will allow entry of BSE positive cases.....

BRING IT!

Watch the dance everyone ............


~SH~

 

[Sandhusker]

Sandcheska: "However, they do have the directive to keep diseases out of the US and they have admitted that opening the border to Canada will allow entry of BSE positive cases."

Show me where USDA has stated that opening the border to Canada will allow entry of BSE positive cases.....

BRING IT!

Watch the dance everyone ............


~SH~

Act like a man and you'll be treated like one. If I want to talk to a child, my son is right here, and he's much more civil and mature than you are.

 

[Sandhusker]

SH, "That's all he ever has. The master of "ILLUSION" creating the "ILLUSION" that the 9th was wrong."

Yep, he's right, Tam. "THOSE WHO CAN'T DEBATE DISCREDIT!"

 

[fedup2]

Heck Sandhusker, play his little game.

Sh!tHead writes:[Show me where USDA has stated that opening the border to Canada will allow entry of BSE positive cases..... ]

If you don't believe the statement, prove him wrong Sh!thead! That is what you expect everyone to do with your dumbass statements.

PROVE THE USDA DIDN'T MAKE THIS STATEMENT!

Watch this folks. Watch the chicken dance!

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzz

Take this stance with everything he posts Sandhusker, then strut around like he does because he can't prove you wrong! :lol: :lol: :lol:
Hell, anyone can play his silly little game.

 

[Anonymous]

Ahem, Oh little Sandcheska....

Show everyone where USDA has stated that opening the border to Canada will allow entry of BSE positive cases.....

Is this another empty claim you can't back?

Of course it is but at least you have Fed up to cheer you on. God only knows how much you need the support group.



~SH~

 

[Sandhusker]

Ahem, Oh little Sandcheska....

Show everyone where USDA has stated that opening the border to Canada will allow entry of BSE positive cases.....

Is this another empty claim you can't back?

Of course it is but at least you have Fed up to cheer you on. God only knows how much you need the support group.



~SH~

Act like a man, you'll be treated like a man.

 

[Anonymous]

Show everyone where USDA has stated that opening the border to Canada will allow entry of BSE positive cases....

Question too difficult for you?


~SH~

 

[fedup2]

PROVE HIM WRONG SH!

Quit dancing and PROVE him wrong!

You made the statement that no one could refute what dittmer wrote & demanded that they do so.
Now I am telling you to refute Sandhusker's statement or shut the hell up!
You made the rules, now lets play with them!

Watch the diversion folks! Watch the chicken dance!
ZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzz

Geeze its easy to play like you do SH, hell anyone can do it!

 

[Anonymous]

The burden of proof falls on the accuser F'ed up, not the accused.

Sandcheska made the claim that USDA stated that opening the border to Canada will allow entry of BSE positive cases.

Sandcheska can't back that claim any more than any claim so why are you coming to his rescue? Blamers support group?

Don't you have some beer cans that need crushing or more cyber threats to make?


~SH~

 

[fedup2]

SH writes: The burden of proof falls on the accuser F'ed up, not the accused.

That is correct SH, you are the accuser! You are accusing Sandhusker of making a false statement. Now the burden of proof is yours.

PROVE HIM WRONG OR SHUT UP! (your style not mine)

(have you beaten up any kids or old ladies lately or do you jusk kick dogs around?)

 

[Anonymous]

Fed Up: "You are accusing Sandhusker of making a false statement."

Yet another lie!

I never said Sandcheska's allegation was false, I simply asked him to back it with proof.

What's wrong? Hate to see a fellow blamer dance around trying to avoid defending his allegation? You can relate can't you? LOL!

Fed Up: "(have you beaten up any kids or old ladies lately or do you jusk kick dogs around?)"

Nah, I open doors for old ladies, love kids, and never kick my dog. I just pick on poor little factually defenseless little packer blamers that lie to fellow cattlemen.


~SH~

 

[fedup2]

PROVE HIM WRONG OR SHUT UP SH!

(again your bad-man style)

 

[Tam]

Tam, "Low is totally arbitrary....."

Thank you for finally admitting it. You just agreed with R-CALF and Judge Cebull and disagreed with the Ninth. Why then are you still siding with the Ninth?

Nice way of taking out the part you wanted to read and leaving out the part that qualifies the whole statement.
Nobody has ever said it wasn't arbitrary Sandhusker the question is
1. Who in the US was granted the DISCRETION to decide the arbitrary, in the AHPA in 2002 by the US Congress? the USDA or a Federal Court judge that uses incorrect legal standards?
2. Wasn't R-CALF trying to prove the USDA didn't follow their own rules?
3. How were they not following their own rules when the Congress gave them the power to make the tough decisions like how low is low?
4. Who gave Cebull and R-CALF the right to decide how low is low for the whole US beef industry?

I guess you missed these questions Sandhusker so I'll repost them

You have BSE in your native herd yet R-CALF claims to have the SAFEST Beef in the World raised to the HIGHEST Standards in the World.
1. How do they rate the Safest beef in the World?
2. How do they rate Highest standards in the World?

You want others to explain how they came to the low risk conclusion so let us see how R-CALF came to the Safest and Highest conclusions. Come on Sandhusker give it your best shot!!!!!!

Now to answer your questions;
I don't know of anywhere that it says USDA has to guarantee no risk. I doubt they have been given that mandate as it would be impossible to fulfill. However, they do have the directive to keep diseases out of the US and they have admitted that opening the border to Canada will allow entry of BSE positive cases. Therefore, their decision should be made for them.

Answer not accepted as the AHPA does not impose any requirements on USDA that all actions carry no associated increase risk of disease. Try again.

Tam, "1. If our herd is as infected with BSE as R-CALF claims then why is it that only one of the millions of cattle that we have exported to the US has ever been found to be positive by the US?"

As R-CALF claims? :shock: Tam, there have been 8 verified cases! What R-CALF "claims" is the undisputed truth! I think the reason that we haven't found more is because the percentage of Canadian origin cattle are a small minority in our herd and the USDA doesn't want to test.

Come on Sandhusker Are you trying to say that R-CALF hasn't compared our BSE prevalance to that of the UK and the EU. ? :roll:
Hasn't R-CALF told everyone that will listen to them that our beef is tainted and unsafe and should not be allowed into the US?
BTW that is 8 verified cases in 4 years Sandhusker.
I guess that means Sandhusker this answer is also not accepted try again!!!!

Tam, "2. If they are just being missed and processed then why haven't we seen a positive cow with the same strain of BSE within your native herd?

Same reasons as above.

R-CALF claimed we had 5.5 per million infected cattle in our herd and you are trying to say only one in the past decade and a half has been exported to the US? Now if there was even one more and it hit your feed system we should have at least seen one US case of the same strain so again WHY HAVEN"T WE? :? So answer Not accepted try again

Tam, "3. If our feed is as contaminated as R-CALF claims and our feed has been exported to the US for decades why haven't we seen any BSE positive US cattle resulting from them eating the same contaminated feed for again DECADES?

Again, as R-CALF claims? :lol: How many cases have you had? Where does BSE come from? All of your feed mills are not exporting to the US.

R-CALF web site Thursday, December 16, 2004I
A series of secret tests on cattle feed conducted by the federal government earlier this year found that more than half the feed tested contained animal parts not listed on the ingredients, according to internal documents obtained by The Vancouver Sun.

The test results raise troubling questions about whether rules banning the feeding of cattle remains to other cattle -- the primary way in which mad cow disease is spread -- are being routinely violated.

According to internal Canadian Food Inspection Agency documents -- obtained by The Sun through the Access to Information Act -- 70 feed samples labelled as vegetable-only were tested by the agency between January and March of this year. Of those, 41 (59 per cent) were found to contain "undeclared animal materials."

the Animals were rodents Sandhusker
But did R-CALF clarify this little doubt filled press release? NO.
Some of those feed samples were imported from the US do you see anything about that little bit of information Sandhusker? again No
Anything to cast a shadow of doubt on the safety of our beef but never willing to clarify misinformation. I guess we all know now where Oldtimer learned his posting habits from don't we. :wink:
How do your question answer my question?
THEY DON"T, so answer not excepted. I asked why you haven't found any positives in the cattle that ate from the same feed source as the Canadian cattle did? Which BTW according to those secret CFIA tests they were not only Canadian feed sources but US feed sources. So if that was cattle remains what happen to the US cattle that ate the US feed that the CFIA tested?

The longer you divert the more questions you are going to have to answer to my satisfaction so you better just getter done!!!!! :wink:

 

[Sandhusker]

Tam, "1. Who in the US was granted the DISCRETION to decide the arbitrary, in the AHPA in 2002 by the US Congress? the USDA or a Federal Court judge that uses incorrect legal standards?"

The discretion to decide the arbitrary? That makes no sense. Do I need to read any further?