comments OT
- Thread starter frenchie
- Start date
Oldtimer
Well-known member
frenchie":2n965dbr said:
Frenchie- Couldn't get the site to open, but I'm sure it is probably the Freidlander story...Anything is possible anymore with government and bureaucrats- looks like GAO should do some more investigating--but I have a hard time believing one formerly fired disgruntled employee- when he claims their are so many more that know about it--In this day of blow the whistle, write a book, and make a million- you'd think they'd be climbing all over each other to get the story out....
Does give more credence to the fact that we should be getting our own house in order before we think about reducing the import regs or opening the border.......Need more proof that all of our own BSE prevention barriers are in place and working before opening our borders to a higher risk country.....
frenchie
Well-known member
Oldtimer":3qhc0oke said:
Here let me save you the trouble...OT..Tuesday, April 12, 2005 Updated at 2:32 PM EST
Canadian Press
Ottawa — A scientist and former inspector for the U.S Department of Agriculture says he is willing to take a lie detector test to back his charge that the United States is covering up mad-cow disease.
Lester Friedlander, now a consumer advocate, was fired from his job as head of inspections at a large meat-packing plant in Philadelphia in 1995 after criticizing what he called unsafe practices.
Mr. Friedlander said U.S. Department of Agriculture veterinarians sent suspect cow brains to private laboratories, which confirmed they were infected with mad cow disease. Samples from the same animals, however, were cleared by government labs.
He would not reveal the names of the veterinarians, saying in an interview that they still work for the agriculture department and would be fired if identified.
The department has denied Mr. Friedlander's allegations, first made in a speech last week in Edmonton.
He is in Ottawa to testify at a Commons committee examining proposed changes to the Canadian food regulation system
SO you are saying he,s a liar.Where is R-Calf on this...are they going to get to the bottom of this and prove it false?
This man raises questions about the U.S.D.a and unsafe practices and was fired.If r- Calf was any kind of cattle org..they should be raising hell to find out the truth one way or the other.
I suppose these guys just hated their jobs too
U.S. accused of covering up mad cow cases
Last Updated Tue, 12 Apr 2005 21:26:58 EDT
CBC News
OTTAWA - There was testimony on Tuesday before a House of Commons committee alleging that the United States has covered up cases of mad cow disease – allegations that are supported by a CBC News investigation.
The testimony raises a question that has been asked many times: how has the U.S. been able to essentially escape bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), also known as mad cow disease, when Canada has had four cases?
Part of the answer could be in a slaughterhouse in Oriskany Falls, N.Y., which eight years ago may have become the home of the first American case of mad cow.
Bobby Godfrey who worked at the plant remembers a cow that arrived.
"I thought it was a mad dog, to tell you the truth. Didn't know what the hell it was. Never seen a cow act like that in all the cows I saw go through there. There was definitely something wrong with it," said Godfrey.
The suspect cow, which was recorded on video obtained by CBC News, was suspected of being the first American case of BSE.
Dr. Masuo Doi was the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) veterinarian in charge of investigating the cow. "Me and my vet, including our inspector, they thought it [the cow] was quite different. They thought it was the BSE," he said.
Doi, recently retired from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, says he's haunted by fears the right tests were not done and that the case was not properly investigated by his own department.
"I don't want to carry on off to my retirement. I want to hand it over to someone to continue, to find out. I think it's very, very important," said Doi, who has never spoken out publicly about his concerns, until now.
Documents obtained by CBC News show that the U.S. government was preparing for the worst. Initial signs pointed to mad cow disease. But further tests were negative.
The final conclusion: a rare brain disorder never reported in that breed of cattle either before or since.
The conclusion, from an independent university lab, seemed to leave no doubt that this was not a case of BSE.
But CBC News has learned that key areas of the brain were never tested. The most important samples somehow went missing.
It's all in a USDA lab report that was left out of the documents officially released by the department. It proves the scientist in charge knew his investigation of the case was limited.
Without the samples, the question remains: could scientists really rule out mad cow disease?
Dr. Karl Langheindrich was the chief scientist at a USDA lab in Athens, Ga., the lab that ran some of the early tests on the cow. Now retired, he too has never spoken publicly about this case before. Without the missing brain tissue, he says, the USDA will never be able to say for sure what was wrong with the cow.
"Based on the clinical symptoms and the description given by the veterinarian you can verify, yes this animal had CNS, central nervous system disease, but you can't specify it in your findings further than that," he said.
With questions about the first cow still lingering, three months later at the same meat plant there was a second American cow with suspicious symptoms.
The second cow's brain was sent for testing and officials were told verbally the tests were negative.
Dr. Doi made repeated requests for documentary proof of the negative tests. To this day he's seen nothing. "How many are buried ... can you really trust our inspection [system?]
For weeks the USDA insisted it had no records for the second cow. Then just a few days ago it suddenly produced documents that it says proves that a cow was tested and that the tests were negative for mad cow disease.
But the documents also prove, once again, there were problems with the testing. This time so much brain tissue was missing it compromised the examination.
The problems were so severe one USDA scientist wrote that his own examination was of "questionable validity" because he couldn't tell what part of the cow's brain he was looking at.
On Tuesday, a former U.S. agriculture inspector repeated a claim before a House of Commons committee that the U.S. has covered up cases of mad cow disease. He says he's willing to take a lie detector test to prove it.
Washington has denied the allegations.
Leslie Friedlander was fired from his job as head of inspections at a meat-packing plant in Philadelphia in 1995 after criticizing what he called unsafe practices[/b]
Oldtimer
Well-known member
frenchie- R-CALF has always fought to give the USDA inspectors more authority and the power to recall- These actions have been fought vigorously by the packers and their supporters, the AMI and NCBA....
After the Washington cow, R-CALF called for testing of all cattle to find if their was BSE in the US herd and if so the extent of infection... They also called for Canada to do the same...
As far as an investigation goes- this looks like one for Congress and GAO where they have subpeona power and ability to take depositions under oath...I'm sure R-CALF will be asking Congress to see if USDA is being derelict in their job....
R-CALF has never said that USDA was lily white--Remember they are the ones that caught USDA sneaking banned beef across the border-- that is one of the reasons they called for the border and import regulations to stay closed to higher risk areas and countries until USDA could assure the producers and consumers that all BSE firewalls were in place and working...USDA's primary job is supposed to be the safety of the "US consumer" and the "US cattle herd"- many (including Judge Cebull) contend that they forgot this role when trying to reopen the border- placing trade and international economics in front of safeguards......
After the Washington cow, R-CALF called for testing of all cattle to find if their was BSE in the US herd and if so the extent of infection... They also called for Canada to do the same...
As far as an investigation goes- this looks like one for Congress and GAO where they have subpeona power and ability to take depositions under oath...I'm sure R-CALF will be asking Congress to see if USDA is being derelict in their job....
R-CALF has never said that USDA was lily white--Remember they are the ones that caught USDA sneaking banned beef across the border-- that is one of the reasons they called for the border and import regulations to stay closed to higher risk areas and countries until USDA could assure the producers and consumers that all BSE firewalls were in place and working...USDA's primary job is supposed to be the safety of the "US consumer" and the "US cattle herd"- many (including Judge Cebull) contend that they forgot this role when trying to reopen the border- placing trade and international economics in front of safeguards......
frenchie
Well-known member
Oldtimer":3cn5y5hk said:
Ought to be real interesting all right... if it turns out to be true..
![Pampers Sensitive Baby Wipes, Clinically Proven, Fragrance Free, Unscented, Water Based, Hypoallergenic, Multi-Use, Hand Wipes 336 Wipes Total (6X Flip-Top Packs) [Packaging May Vary]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/41KLBHu9CAL._SL500_.jpg)
Oldtimer
Well-known member
Experts: No mad cow in second 1997 animal
By STEVE MITCHELL
WASHINGTON, April 15 (UPI) -- A cow with obvious signs of a brain disease appeared in a slaughterhouse in upstate New York in August 1997, generating concerns about mad cow disease because it initially tested positive for the deadly disorder.
Recent media reports have suggested there were procedural problems with testing the cow and that it might have been possible the animal was infected with the mad cow pathogen -- also known as bovine spongiform encephalopathy or BSE.
The initial test turned out to be invalid, however, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture tested the animal multiple times, finding nothing to indicate the cow was infected with BSE and ultimately ruling it negative, a two-year investigation by United Press International has revealed.
USDA officials have denied assertions the cow was not properly tested and pointed out the testing records show the cows were tested multiple times and found to be negative.
In mid-August 1997, USDA veterinarian Masuo Doi inspected a 2-year-old cow at the Oriskany Falls Packing plant in Oriskany Falls, N.Y. The young cow was unable to stand and showed other symptoms that made it a candidate for BSE testing.
Another suspicious cow had been delivered to the plant just three months earlier. It also initially was suspected of being infected with BSE. Doi said a USDA laboratory pathologist, who initially looked at brain tissue from that cow, suspected the animal was infected, but subsequent testing at a different USDA lab came back negative.
The events of that earlier case had left Doi skeptical about the USDA's testing procedures, however, so when the suspicious cow appeared just a few months later, he secretly obtained a sample of the cerebrospinal fluid from the animal and sent it by FedEx to Joe Gibbs, head of the National Institutes of Health's Laboratory for Central Nervous System Studies in Bethesda, Md. -- a now-defunct lab that conducted groundbreaking work on mad cow and similar disorders in humans.
"We didn't distrust the USDA lab on the first case ... but by this time we did," said Doi, who worked for USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service for nearly 30 years before retiring in December. "That's why we took our own sample."
The inspectors also videotaped the animal and UPI was shown the tape. It shows a cow lying down with its right eye pointing up. The animal did not respond to rapid hand motion in front of its eye or having its nose or ears tapped with a stick. The cow would not drink water and its hind legs seemed paralyzed. It also could not stand up.
Doi said new information discovered about the May case by UPI persuaded him that the cow was negative for BSE. He still wonders what type of disorder afflicted the August cow, but said it did not appear to be BSE.
In response to recent media accounts that have implied he was suggesting mad cow cases have been covered up by the USDA, Doi said, "I don't think you have enough to say that BSE is being covered up in the United States."
Gibbs, who died in 2001, said the cerebrospinal-fluid test came back positive. However, Michael Hansen, a biologist with the Consumers Union, told UPI that Gibbs later informed him the CSF sample was contaminated with blood -- which would cause the test to turn positive, whether the cow was infected with mad cow disease or not.
An entry in a logbook kept by Gibbs, in which the CSF sample was noted, was obtained by UPI. In that entry, the sample is described as "bloody."
Gibbs decided to look into the issue anyway and contacted Linda Detwiler, a veterinarian and head of the USDA's BSE surveillance program at the time. Gibbs knew Detwiler and asked her if the cow had been tested for BSE by the USDA.
Detwiler confirmed to UPI that Gibbs had called her and informed her of the positive CSF result, but she said the result was a false positive, because the sample was obtained after the animal died and it contained blood.
Michael Harrington, a scientist with the Huntington Medical Research Institute in Pasadena, Calif., told UPI that both conditions -- blood contamination and being obtained after death -- would cause the CSF test to produce a positive whether or not the animal was infected with mad cow. The problem with blood in the sample is the CSF test detects a protein called 14-3-3 that can be an indication of brain damage, but the protein also is found in blood.
Harrington, who helped develop the CSF test, said the problem with a sample taken after death is it "would always be positive in my experience and there would be no way to distinguish it from any disease."
The cow in question already had undergone one type of mad cow test at the USDA, a test called immunohistochemistry. This came back negative for any signs of BSE.
Detwiler said in response to the phone call from Gibbs that she asked the USDA lab to pull the sample from the animal and retest it using another test called Western blot. This test also failed to find any evidence of BSE.
Detwiler's account is confirmed in USDA testing records obtained by UPI through the Freedom of Information Act.
A report in USDA's testing records notes that a histopathological examination -- a rudimentary test considered unreliable for excluding mad cow cases -- was "of questionable validity because it is unknown whether" the tissue being examined included the obex region.
The report went on to state the examination "revealed no combination of lesions which is consistent with ... bovine spongiform encephalopathy."
Based on all the evidence in the case, the USDA officials at the lab concluded, "No evidence of infection by any agent which is known to cause a transmissible spongiform encephalopathy was found."
Elizabeth Mumford, a veterinarian and BSE expert at Safe Food Solutions in Bern, Switzerland, a company that provides advice on reducing mad cow risk to industry and governments, reviewed the records of the case for UPI and said, " I think actually they did a good job."
Mumford said her colleagues in Switzerland had also looked at the documents and they agreed there was nothing to indicate this cow might have been positive.
"There's no alarm bells ringing over on this side of pond," she said.
Detwiler, who is now retired from the USDA but still is respected by BSE experts and has a reputation for being forthright, told UPI, "I didn't have any doubt then or now that it wasn't BSE."
Steve Mitchell is UPI's Medical Correspondent. E-mail: [email protected]
By STEVE MITCHELL
WASHINGTON, April 15 (UPI) -- A cow with obvious signs of a brain disease appeared in a slaughterhouse in upstate New York in August 1997, generating concerns about mad cow disease because it initially tested positive for the deadly disorder.
Recent media reports have suggested there were procedural problems with testing the cow and that it might have been possible the animal was infected with the mad cow pathogen -- also known as bovine spongiform encephalopathy or BSE.
The initial test turned out to be invalid, however, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture tested the animal multiple times, finding nothing to indicate the cow was infected with BSE and ultimately ruling it negative, a two-year investigation by United Press International has revealed.
USDA officials have denied assertions the cow was not properly tested and pointed out the testing records show the cows were tested multiple times and found to be negative.
In mid-August 1997, USDA veterinarian Masuo Doi inspected a 2-year-old cow at the Oriskany Falls Packing plant in Oriskany Falls, N.Y. The young cow was unable to stand and showed other symptoms that made it a candidate for BSE testing.
Another suspicious cow had been delivered to the plant just three months earlier. It also initially was suspected of being infected with BSE. Doi said a USDA laboratory pathologist, who initially looked at brain tissue from that cow, suspected the animal was infected, but subsequent testing at a different USDA lab came back negative.
The events of that earlier case had left Doi skeptical about the USDA's testing procedures, however, so when the suspicious cow appeared just a few months later, he secretly obtained a sample of the cerebrospinal fluid from the animal and sent it by FedEx to Joe Gibbs, head of the National Institutes of Health's Laboratory for Central Nervous System Studies in Bethesda, Md. -- a now-defunct lab that conducted groundbreaking work on mad cow and similar disorders in humans.
"We didn't distrust the USDA lab on the first case ... but by this time we did," said Doi, who worked for USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service for nearly 30 years before retiring in December. "That's why we took our own sample."
The inspectors also videotaped the animal and UPI was shown the tape. It shows a cow lying down with its right eye pointing up. The animal did not respond to rapid hand motion in front of its eye or having its nose or ears tapped with a stick. The cow would not drink water and its hind legs seemed paralyzed. It also could not stand up.
Doi said new information discovered about the May case by UPI persuaded him that the cow was negative for BSE. He still wonders what type of disorder afflicted the August cow, but said it did not appear to be BSE.
In response to recent media accounts that have implied he was suggesting mad cow cases have been covered up by the USDA, Doi said, "I don't think you have enough to say that BSE is being covered up in the United States."
Gibbs, who died in 2001, said the cerebrospinal-fluid test came back positive. However, Michael Hansen, a biologist with the Consumers Union, told UPI that Gibbs later informed him the CSF sample was contaminated with blood -- which would cause the test to turn positive, whether the cow was infected with mad cow disease or not.
An entry in a logbook kept by Gibbs, in which the CSF sample was noted, was obtained by UPI. In that entry, the sample is described as "bloody."
Gibbs decided to look into the issue anyway and contacted Linda Detwiler, a veterinarian and head of the USDA's BSE surveillance program at the time. Gibbs knew Detwiler and asked her if the cow had been tested for BSE by the USDA.
Detwiler confirmed to UPI that Gibbs had called her and informed her of the positive CSF result, but she said the result was a false positive, because the sample was obtained after the animal died and it contained blood.
Michael Harrington, a scientist with the Huntington Medical Research Institute in Pasadena, Calif., told UPI that both conditions -- blood contamination and being obtained after death -- would cause the CSF test to produce a positive whether or not the animal was infected with mad cow. The problem with blood in the sample is the CSF test detects a protein called 14-3-3 that can be an indication of brain damage, but the protein also is found in blood.
Harrington, who helped develop the CSF test, said the problem with a sample taken after death is it "would always be positive in my experience and there would be no way to distinguish it from any disease."
The cow in question already had undergone one type of mad cow test at the USDA, a test called immunohistochemistry. This came back negative for any signs of BSE.
Detwiler said in response to the phone call from Gibbs that she asked the USDA lab to pull the sample from the animal and retest it using another test called Western blot. This test also failed to find any evidence of BSE.
Detwiler's account is confirmed in USDA testing records obtained by UPI through the Freedom of Information Act.
A report in USDA's testing records notes that a histopathological examination -- a rudimentary test considered unreliable for excluding mad cow cases -- was "of questionable validity because it is unknown whether" the tissue being examined included the obex region.
The report went on to state the examination "revealed no combination of lesions which is consistent with ... bovine spongiform encephalopathy."
Based on all the evidence in the case, the USDA officials at the lab concluded, "No evidence of infection by any agent which is known to cause a transmissible spongiform encephalopathy was found."
Elizabeth Mumford, a veterinarian and BSE expert at Safe Food Solutions in Bern, Switzerland, a company that provides advice on reducing mad cow risk to industry and governments, reviewed the records of the case for UPI and said, " I think actually they did a good job."
Mumford said her colleagues in Switzerland had also looked at the documents and they agreed there was nothing to indicate this cow might have been positive.
"There's no alarm bells ringing over on this side of pond," she said.
Detwiler, who is now retired from the USDA but still is respected by BSE experts and has a reputation for being forthright, told UPI, "I didn't have any doubt then or now that it wasn't BSE."
Steve Mitchell is UPI's Medical Correspondent. E-mail: [email protected]
frenchie
Well-known member
Oldtimer":20qc6ldo said:
But CBC News has learned that key areas of the brain were never tested. The most important samples somehow went missing.
It's all in a USDA lab report that was left out of the documents officially released by the department. It proves the scientist in charge knew his investigation of the case was limited.
Without the samples, the question remains: could scientists really rule out mad cow disease
For weeks the USDA insisted it had no records for the second cow. Then just a few days ago it suddenly produced documents that it says proves that a cow was tested and that the tests were negative for mad cow disease.
But the documents also prove, once again, there were problems with the testing. This time so much brain tissue was missing it compromised the examination.
The problems were so severe one USDA scientist wrote that his own examination was of "questionable validity" because he couldn't tell what part of the cow's brain he was looking at
On Tuesday, a former U.S. agriculture inspector repeated a claim before a House of Commons committee that the U.S. has covered up cases of mad cow disease. He says he's willing to take a lie detector test to prove it.
Washington has denied the allegations
Oldtimer
Well-known member
Frenchie- Kind of looks like everybody will believe what ever they want to believe which ever side of the BSE fence you sit on or border you live on.....Too bad the USDA has had so many screwups that they have lost a lot of their credibility-CFIA is as bad--but the media on both sides of the border has much less ............
frenchie
Well-known member
Oldtimer":15734cg9 said:
OT...Its not just the media...what about these vets making these statements?Whats their motives?
As far as the side of the border I sit on it does,nt matter.I will shortly own cattle on both sides of the border once again.So either way it still concerns me.
Oldtimer
Well-known member
frenchie":3fmao0vh said:
Good for you frenchie-- Thats the good thing about living in a free country like the USA-- too bad parts of your socialist north country won't allow US citizens to buy land or invest in cattle without being discriminated against..
frenchie
Well-known member
Oldtimer":p05g44e4 said:
Discrimate against U.S citizens get real Oldtimer, hell the goverment helps them with grants etc to settle up here..
There are a least 15 former American ranchers in the surrounding area.
I personally have assisted some of them .
Oldtimer
Well-known member
frenchie":2bz7klx9 said:
frenchie- An American can not buy ranchland in Saskatchewan unless they have a Canadian partner-- US investors that bought cattle in Canada were blocked from having them slaughtered because of their political affiliations-- things that could not happen in a free republic like the US.
Sounds awful isolatonist to me....But please do keep taking the draft dodgers, deserters, and socialist secularist liberals that hate the US so bad...... ;-)
frenchie
Well-known member
Oldtimer":1rj8or79 said:
Oldtimer you are so full of shitt, your eyes are brown.
SINP — Farm Owner / Operator Category
WHO IS ELIGIBLE?
Farm owner/operator nominees will be individuals with proven experience in farming, substantial capital available to invest in a farming operation, and who have made a signed offer to purchase land for a farming operation in Saskatchewan.
ASSESSMENT OF FARM OWNER/OPERATOR APPLICATIONS
Under the SINP, Saskatchewan can nominate individuals who intend to purchase and operate a farming operation in Saskatchewan. Applicants considering applying under this category are encouraged to contact SINP officials to learn more about the eligibility criteria of the program. SINP officials will also ensure applicants are contacted by officials in Saskatchewan Agriculture, Food and Rural Revitalization who can advise them on the type of farming operation they intend to operate in Saskatchewan.
There are four eligibility criteria for the Farm Owner/Operator category:
Available Equity — applicants must provide verifiable documents showing a net worth of $500,000.
Committed equity investments — applicants must supply a signed offer to purchase with an appropriate deposit on a Saskatchewan farming operation, or land for a new farm operation.
Mandatory visit to Saskatchewan — applicants are required to visit Saskatchewan within the two-year period prior to making a signed offer to purchase or shortly after.
Farm operation knowledge and experience — applicants must provide documentation (e.g. education and training, work experience, financial documents of their previous operations) that demonstrate that they are knowledgeable farm operators. If necessary, this may be further verified by a personal interview with the applicant in Saskatchewan.
The farm owner/operator category is restricted to proprietary businesses that include primary agricultural production. Agri-business operations that do not involve primary agricultural production, or farm operations that involve some form of joint venture with existing Saskatchewan operations, would be eligible to apply under the Business category.
APPLYING
Farm owner/operator applicants must provide the following forms:
SINP-100-3: Saskatchewan SINP Application—Farmer Owner/Operator
This form must be completed by the principal applicant.
SINP-200-1: Record of global personal finances—Personal Net Worth
This form must be completed by the principal applicant.
SINP-200-3: Record of global business finances—Business Net Worth
This form must be completed by the principal applicant.
IMM-0008: Application for Permanent Residence in Canada
This form must be completed by the principal applicant.
Schedule 1: Background / Declaration
This form must be completed by the principal applicant and:
• his or her spouse or common-law partner (if applicable); and
• all dependant children aged 18 years or older listed in the application for
permanent residence.
Schedule 4: Economic Classes—Provincial Nominees
This form must be completed by the principal applicant.
Schedule 6: Economic Classes—Business Immigrants
This form must be completed by the principal applicant.
IMM-5406: Additional Family Information
This form must be completed by the principal applicant and:
• his or her spouse or common-law partner (if applicable); and
• all dependant children aged 18 years or older listed in the application for
permanent residence.
The principal applicant may complete one or both of the following forms, if applicable:
(a) Use this form to designate an authorized representative to handle your file: IMM-5476 — Use of a Representative. This form also authorizes CIC to release information to and deal with your representative on matters pertaining to your file.
(b) Use this form if you wish to have your application information sent to a designated individual other than your representative: IMM 5475 — Authority to Release Personal Information to a Designated Individual.
For more information: Instructions on using a representative (PDF file).
Farm owner/operator applicants must also provide the following documents:
Bank confirmation of business funds.
Signed offer of purchase for land for an agricultural operation in Saskatchewan.
Bank confirmation of personal funds
Birth certificates (for applicant and immediate family-members that list both
parents) marriage certificate, divorce, custody and maintenance documents.
If originals cannot be submitted, certified or notarized copies will be acceptable.
Education credentials, as applicable - originals or certified/notarized documents
will be accepable.
Trade credentials, as applicable - originals or certified/notarized documents will
be acceptable.
Language competency (English or French) (upon request).
A police report from the last country where an applicant and accompanying family
members over the age of 18 have lived for more than six months.
Valid Passport (photo copy only) with expiry date no less than two years hence. Each individual family member must obtain a personal passport.)
Where documents are not in English, the applicant must provide a translation performed by a certified translator.
Please submit the application and supporting documentation to:
Saskatchewan Government Relations and Aboriginal Affairs
Saskatchewan Immigrant Nominee Program
2nd Floor, 1919 Saskatchewan Drive
Regina SK S4P 3V7
CANADA
Phone: (Canada 001) 306-798-SINP (7467)
Fax: (Canada 001) 306-798-0713
E-mail: [email protected]
Really OLdtimer how much money did you lose ?I reckon a fair bit, Bye the way your whining.
Its not Canadian Producers fault that the American packers refused to buy your cattle.You did it to yourselves, you knew that it was risky..As my old man used to say... you bought the ticket, you take the ride.
Tell me what did R-calf members with cattle on feed in Canada, expect from the American Packers after you slapped their hands.Welcome Wagon?
I suppose you expected the
Mounties to force the American packers to buy your cattle.Or perhaps you wanted to be at the front of the line.
More OT garbage..I mean bear bait. BTW how much money did you lose?
NM CowBelle
Active member
Frenchie,You are a nation full of cowardly draft doggers and deserters.As far as owning land up there notice it said you had to be nominated by someone from Saskatchewan.I personally think the boarders should stay closed!!!!As far as some big cover-up here in the U.S. You've read one to many spy novels.
2centsworth
Well-known member
Have you served in the armed forces? If not, then don't insult others who chose not to. My guess is you are like every other smoke-blowing American who supports war, as long as they and their loved ones don't have to lose their lives for it.
And for a little history lesson, Canada was founded as a colony of England - same as the United States.
NM CowBelle
Active member
As a matter of fact I do have loved ones that have served in the Armed Forces.My husband was called up to go to Iraq the first time.My uncle proudly served in Vietnam.My Grandfather retired from the Air Force.So I don't need you telling me about not insulting people who don't have enough guts to follow through on a commitment they made to protect the United States in times of Peace and WAR time.
frenchie
Well-known member
NM CowBelle":1swyiv8t said:
Yeah right. we are just full of U.S draft dodgers
As far as cowards...You better back off Lady..There is a lot of my family buried in Europe..As a result of WW1,WW2,Korea..I might add they were there yrs before some other countries.
I don,t have to read spy novels...my infomation comes from the evening news
lucky us
Active member
Frenchie, before you start getting defensive with my wife make sure that she was trying to personally insult you. We know that draft dodgers from the U.S. went to Canada. As far as I'm concerned the people that ran, instead of staying and fulfilling there duties, are cowards. I do have the right to say that because I proudly served in the United States Army, and so did my dad and both of my grandfathers
frenchie
Well-known member
lucky us":1hjbgfaj said:
Well I personally commend you for your service..My draft dodger comment was meant to be sarcastic.
This country is full of honest hardworking people that want only to make a living..the same as anyone else.Not full of *@!&!@#!@!@ draft dodgers as your wife stated.
As far as I am concerned any deserters should have been lined up and shot and sent back C.O.D to their country of origin .
