• Welcome to the Chronicle Forums.
    Please complete your profile. The forums and the rest of www.chronofhorse.com has single sign-in, so your log in information for one will automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.

Announcement

Collapse

Forum rules and no-advertising policy

As a participant on this forum, it is your responsibility to know and follow our rules. Please read this message in its entirety.

Board Rules

1. You’re responsible for what you say.
As outlined in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, The Chronicle of the Horse and its affiliates, as well Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., the developers of vBulletin, are not legally responsible for statements made in the forums.

This is a public forum viewed by a wide spectrum of people, so please be mindful of what you say and who might be reading it—details of personal disputes are likely better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts that violate these rules. Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting, but administrators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts upon request.

Outright inflammatory, vulgar, harassing, malicious or otherwise inappropriate statements and criminal charges unsubstantiated by a reputable news source or legal documentation will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

2. Conversations in horse-related forums should be horse-related.
The forums are a wonderful source of information and support for members of the horse community. While it’s understandably tempting to share information or search for input on other topics upon which members might have a similar level of knowledge, members must maintain the focus on horses.

3. Keep conversations productive, on topic and civil.
Discussion and disagreement are inevitable and encouraged; personal insults, diatribes and sniping comments are unproductive and unacceptable. Whether a subject is light-hearted or serious, keep posts focused on the current topic and of general interest to other participants of that thread. Utilize the private message feature or personal email where appropriate to address side topics or personal issues not related to the topic at large.

4. No advertising in the discussion forums.
Posts in the discussion forums directly or indirectly advertising horses, jobs, items or services for sale or wanted will be removed at the discretion of the moderators. Use of the private messaging feature or email addresses obtained through users’ profiles for unsolicited advertising is not permitted.

Company representatives may participate in discussions and answer questions about their products or services, or suggest their products on recent threads if they fulfill the criteria of a query. False "testimonials" provided by company affiliates posing as general consumers are not appropriate, and self-promotion of sales, ad campaigns, etc. through the discussion forums is not allowed.

Paid advertising is available on our classifieds site and through the purchase of banner ads. The tightly monitored Giveaways forum permits free listings of genuinely free horses and items available or wanted (on a limited basis). Items offered for trade are not allowed.

Advertising Policy Specifics
When in doubt of whether something you want to post constitutes advertising, please contact a moderator privately in advance for further clarification. Refer to the following points for general guidelines:

Horses – Only general discussion about the buying, leasing, selling and pricing of horses is permitted. If the post contains, or links to, the type of specific information typically found in a sales or wanted ad, and it’s related to a horse for sale, regardless of who’s selling it, it doesn’t belong in the discussion forums.

Stallions – Board members may ask for suggestions on breeding stallion recommendations. Stallion owners may reply to such queries by suggesting their own stallions, only if their horse fits the specific criteria of the original poster. Excessive promotion of a stallion by its owner or related parties is not permitted and will be addressed at the discretion of the moderators.

Services – Members may use the forums to ask for general recommendations of trainers, barns, shippers, farriers, etc., and other members may answer those requests by suggesting themselves or their company, if their services fulfill the specific criteria of the original post. Members may not solicit other members for business if it is not in response to a direct, genuine query.

Products – While members may ask for general opinions and suggestions on equipment, trailers, trucks, etc., they may not list the specific attributes for which they are in the market, as such posts serve as wanted ads.

Event Announcements – Members may post one notification of an upcoming event that may be of interest to fellow members, if the original poster does not benefit financially from the event. Such threads may not be “bumped” excessively. Premium members may post their own notices in the Event Announcements forum.

Charities/Rescues – Announcements for charitable or fundraising events can only be made for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. Special exceptions may be made, at the moderators’ discretion and direction, for board-related events or fundraising activities in extraordinary circumstances.

Occasional posts regarding horses available for adoption through IRS-registered horse rescue or placement programs are permitted in the appropriate forums, but these threads may be limited at the discretion of the moderators. Individuals may not advertise or make announcements for horses in need of rescue, placement or adoption unless the horse is available through a recognized rescue or placement agency or government-run entity or the thread fits the criteria for and is located in the Giveaways forum.

5. Do not post copyrighted photographs unless you have purchased that photo and have permission to do so.

6. Respect other members.
As members are often passionate about their beliefs and intentions can easily be misinterpreted in this type of environment, try to explore or resolve the inevitable disagreements that arise in the course of threads calmly and rationally.

If you see a post that you feel violates the rules of the board, please click the “alert” button (exclamation point inside of a triangle) in the bottom left corner of the post, which will alert ONLY the moderators to the post in question. They will then take whatever action, or no action, as deemed appropriate for the situation at their discretion. Do not air grievances regarding other posters or the moderators in the discussion forums.

Please be advised that adding another user to your “Ignore” list via your User Control Panel can be a useful tactic, which blocks posts and private messages by members whose commentary you’d rather avoid reading.

7. We have the right to reproduce statements made in the forums.
The Chronicle of the Horse may copy, quote, link to or otherwise reproduce posts, or portions of posts, in print or online for advertising or editorial purposes, if attributed to their original authors, and by posting in this forum, you hereby grant to The Chronicle of the Horse a perpetual, non-exclusive license under copyright and other rights, to do so.

8. We reserve the right to enforce and amend the rules.
The moderators may delete, edit, move or close any post or thread at any time, or refrain from doing any of the foregoing, in their discretion, and may suspend or revoke a user’s membership privileges at any time to maintain adherence to the rules and the general spirit of the forum. These rules may be amended at any time to address the current needs of the board.

Please see our full Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

(Revised 1/26/16)
See more
See less

Disgusting - Video of a horse shot in the head by a slaughter proponent in New Mexico

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Bluey View Post
    Thank you for your opinion.
    Well unless you are willing to back up all your Because "I know" statements with fact, How are you any more credible than the Animal rights wackos!

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Bluey View Post
      You see, all you want is something to pick, pick, pick.
      Come on, be serious, you can do better than that.
      Try using your nogging and think if what you just said makes sense.

      I expect now some will again get on Fairfax, since he said he was in the plants and part of their protocol advisors and of course, that is definitively not good enough, considering ...

      On second thought, I may ought to elaborate to help with comprehension:
      I said certain machinery needed replacing, but since they were about to close the plant, they were running that machinery on a shoestring, not that the plant itself was.
      Contrary to your "protocol" claims, Fairfax's postings make logical sense and appear to be very similar to testing in the U.S. When a question is posed to Fairfax to which he doesn't have an answer...he gets back to us.

      Your "protocols" defy common sense logic.

      I do believe many of us are sick and tired of having the animal rights activist label being thrown about at anyone who doesn't agree with you.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Bluey View Post
        Well, at least you quit demanding, that is good.

        I will still state, what I know should weigh more than animal rights extremist myths, out of context stories and propaganda ought to, any day, for those that understand their rights to have animals are in the end hanging in the balance.

        I have said it before, slaughter or not, to BAN slaughter is the problem here, that furthers animal rights extremists to their ultimate goal of "no more domestic animals and none too soon for me".
        Wel Bluey, I do remember that you have stated this testing of "every single horse" on this thread and other threads. When pressed for how you know this, you have in the past admitted that this was told to you by someone you knew that worked at the the plant. That is not a fact, that is simple hearsay and in the case of saying every horse was tested, it is also complete and total bull crap.

        I know that at one time I did the research into the USDA and CFIA records and found out that less than 1% of the horses were actually tested. Angela Freda also produced this same research just in the past few weeks, she is a master at researching actual facts with links to official government sites to verify the info. Perhaps I will find the time to locate and repost her most recent links, that included the Dallas plant in question, and its abysmal test rate of less than 1%.

        You can try to buffalo people into believing that you are an expert, but government statistics say you are full of bull on this issue. I don't think you know much more about sample analysis, protocol, etc, either.

        So go on with your usual bluster about your RARA hangups, no amount of reason, facts or evidence can sway you on that issue. But at least try a little to stay on tract and not deflect the issues, and try to stick with facts, not hearsay, BS and bluster.
        Last edited by ADM7040; Mar. 26, 2013, 10:19 PM. Reason: wrong acronym
        Annabelle Mayr, Arcadia Farm
        Home of Fitz, Austria & Erin
        Now over the Rainbow Bridge: Daeo, Max, Finn, Jake, Seamus & Pleasure

        Comment


        • Originally posted by ADM7040 View Post
          Wel Bluey, I do remember that you have stated this testing of "every single horse" on this thread and other threads. When pressed for how you know this, you have in the past admitted that this was told to you by someone you knew that worked at the the plant. That is not a fact, that is simple hearsay and in the case of saying every horse was tested, it is also complete and total bull crap.

          I know that at one time I did the research into the FDA and CFIA records and found out that less than 1% of the horses were actually tested. Angela Freda also produced this same research just in the past few weeks, she is a master at researching actual facts with links to official government sites to verify the info. Perhaps I will find the time to locate and repost her most recent links, that included the Dallas plant in question, and its abysmal test rate of less than 1%.

          You can try to buffalo people into believing that you are an expert, but government statistics say you are full of bull on this issue. I don't think you know much more about sample analysis, protocol, etc, either.

          So go on with your usual bluster about your RARA hangups, no amount of reason, facts or evidence can sway you on that issue. But at least try a little to stay on tract and not deflect the issues, and try to stick with facts, not hearsay, BS and bluster.
          One more time, ok?
          I know that from one of the people that were doing the testing, plus have heard others working there make references to that.
          When I asked why that protocol, was given the reasons I already posted.

          No, I was not there doing the testing and yes, you are free to believe or not.
          I do and that is why I posted that, also explained and just did again how I know.

          You think that would be enough, you can either believe it or not, why is that so hard to understand?

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Bluey View Post
            One more time, ok?
            I know that from one of the people that were doing the testing, plus have heard others working there make references to that.
            When I asked why that protocol, was given the reasons I already posted.

            No, I was not there doing the testing and yes, you are free to believe or not.
            I do and that is why I posted that, also explained and just did again how I know.

            You think that would be enough, you can either believe it or not, why is that so hard to understand?
            Because you continue to play fast and loose with the truth.

            As far as protocol....http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2y8Sx4B2Sk

            Comment


            • Originally posted by LauraKY View Post
              Because you continue to play fast and loose with the truth.

              As far as protocol....http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2y8Sx4B2Sk
              You think so?
              Guess that if you were on my side you would agree I had some believable facts there.
              That may make a difference, why I don't think some are as much on the fence as they pretend.

              How about the "other" side, just finally caught paying $100,000+ to lie about abuse in the circus?

              I say THAT is being caught playing fast and loose with the truth.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by LauraKY View Post
                First you said


                Then you said



                So which one is right? Every horse was tested or some horses were tested? And tested for what? Bute? Bacterial contamination? Other drugs? No drugs? Are you saying that the EU requirements were more stringent when the Dallas Crown plant was still open than they are now?

                According to Fairfax




                So Bluey, I understand that you're trying to make me out as the village idiot who doesn't understand testing protocols and requirements and that might make someone else just go away and give up...but that doesn't work for me. I still say you're full of it.
                This is in Canada. I do not know if they tested each animal in the U.S. but I would expect they had a very high degree of testing especially when they were coming under fire. I remember speaking with a USDA inspector and he told me the equine meat was held to a higher standard and tested more than they did for beef, pork and chicken EXCEPT when there was the mad cow scare.

                Mad Cow brings forth more testing because of public concern...not because of health concerns.
                The Elephant in the room

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Bluey View Post
                  You think so?
                  Guess that if you were on my side you would agree I had some believable facts there.
                  That may make a difference, why I don't think some are as much on the fence as they pretend.

                  How about the "other" side, just finally caught paying $100,000+ to lie about abuse in the circus?

                  I say THAT is being caught playing fast and loose with the truth.
                  What's believable? Saying you knew someone who worked there is not fact. like adm said it is hearsay.

                  Comment


                  • See that's a concern to me. It sounds like they don't actually care about the health concern, only the publics perception of it.

                    Originally posted by Fairfax View Post
                    This is in Canada. I do not know if they tested each animal in the U.S. but I would expect they had a very high degree of testing especially when they were coming under fire. I remember speaking with a USDA inspector and he told me the equine meat was held to a higher standard and tested more than they did for beef, pork and chicken EXCEPT when there was the mad cow scare.

                    Mad Cow brings forth more testing because of public concern...not because of health concerns.
                    The problem with political jokes is that they get elected.
                    H. Cate

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Fairfax View Post
                      This is in Canada. I do not know if they tested each animal in the U.S. but I would expect they had a very high degree of testing especially when they were coming under fire. I remember speaking with a USDA inspector and he told me the equine meat was held to a higher standard and tested more than they did for beef, pork and chicken EXCEPT when there was the mad cow scare.

                      Mad Cow brings forth more testing because of public concern...not because of health concerns.
                      Right, many inspectors from several plants always commented that horse slaughter plants for human consumption were some of the most inspected of all.
                      When asked they said because it was part of foreign trade and that added some more layers to their regulations.

                      Yes, that is hearsay also and all that is worth.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Bluey View Post
                        You think so?
                        Guess that if you were on my side you would agree I had some believable facts there.
                        That may make a difference, why I don't think some are as much on the fence as they pretend.

                        . How about the "other" side, just finally caught paying $100,000+ to lie about abuse in the circus?

                        I say THAT is being caught playing fast and loose with the truth.
                        I have been accused of the same. Funny...when I stated protocol regarding process these same people stated they didn't believe any thing I was saying. They didn't believe that changes were made...easy to throw darts when they have never been to an equine slaughter plan in the U.S. or more important..Canada where slaughter is acrtive.

                        There are protocols for horse seizures.

                        There aare protocols when a vet comes out to your farm to inspect your horses for a health certificate. They would only test for a specific disease if there were known cases in your area i.e. west nile

                        There are protocols when you go to a dentists office regarding sterilization.. Oh Oh...Dentists have been acfused and found guilty of lack of proper procedure...especially when AIDs was first identified.

                        There were many unsubstantiated cases but i am unable to find any case proven in court.

                        Therefore hysteria appears to be the protocol of those who are anti slaughter
                        The Elephant in the room

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Bluey View Post
                          You think so?
                          Guess that if you were on my side you would agree I had some believable facts there.
                          That may make a difference, why I don't think some are as much on the fence as they pretend.

                          How about the "other" side, just finally caught paying $100,000+ to lie about abuse in the circus?

                          I say THAT is being caught playing fast and loose with the truth.
                          I don't have a "side." And I call them as I see them, whether on my "side" or not.

                          I'm not disputing Fairfax's facts...just yours.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by JGHIRETIRE View Post
                            See that's a concern to me. It sounds like they don't actually care about the health concern, only the publics perception of it.
                            There is a cost factor. Despite people saying they want everything they will ever consume tested...they are not willing to pay 20.00 per pound for hamburger and $40 for 6 pork chops.

                            Prices for food are based on quantity of the product, speed it is processed and quick movement to the point of sale.

                            External pricing is influenced by fuel, wages, etc.

                            We have the cheapest food in the world.

                            Ask a family of four it they could survive with an increase in grocery costs of $400 plus per month?

                            Nothing in the world is 100% nor should we expect it to be, IF you want that...grow it yourself.
                            The Elephant in the room

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Bluey View Post
                              One more time, ok?
                              I know that from one of the people that were doing the testing, plus have heard others working there make references to that.
                              When I asked why that protocol, was given the reasons I already posted.

                              No, I was not there doing the testing and yes, you are free to believe or not.
                              I do and that is why I posted that, also explained and just did again how I know.

                              You think that would be enough, you can either believe it or not, why is that so hard to understand?
                              Heard it from a friend of a friend.......
                              WELL, I HEARD from a friend of a friend(actually, a FB friend, does that count?)
                              that they do not test every animal. Believable, or just me recounting hearsay?

                              Yeah, that's what I thought.
                              "Anti-intellect and marketing, pretty, pretty, who needs talent
                              Crying eyes, we're so outnumbered, fight for the right to remain silent" Buck 65

                              Comment


                              • We have the right to safe food. You know as well as I do they cut corners everywhere.

                                Originally posted by Fairfax View Post
                                There is a cost factor. Despite people saying they want everything they will ever consume tested...they are not willing to pay 20.00 per pound for hamburger and $40 for 6 pork chops.

                                Prices for food are based on quantity of the product, speed it is processed and quick movement to the point of sale.

                                External pricing is influenced by fuel, wages, etc.

                                We have the cheapest food in the world.

                                Ask a family of four it they could survive with an increase in grocery costs of $400 plus per month?

                                Nothing in the world is 100% nor should we expect it to be, IF you want that...grow it yourself.
                                The problem with political jokes is that they get elected.
                                H. Cate

                                Comment


                                • Originally posted by Fairfax View Post
                                  There is a cost factor. Despite people saying they want everything they will ever consume tested...they are not willing to pay 20.00 per pound for hamburger and $40 for 6 pork chops.

                                  Prices for food are based on quantity of the product, speed it is processed and quick movement to the point of sale.

                                  External pricing is influenced by fuel, wages, etc.

                                  We have the cheapest food in the world.

                                  Ask a family of four it they could survive with an increase in grocery costs of $400 plus per month?


                                  Nothing in the world is 100% nor should we expect it to be, IF you want that...grow it yourself.
                                  Exactly. My point exactly. Common sense tells us that Bluey's "every horse was tested" is a figment of someone's imagination.

                                  Those of us who can and choose to afford it and are concerned about our food safety try to buy animal products that are hormone and antibiotic free and have been fed vegetarian diets. Nothing is 100% safe, not even what you grow in your own backyard.

                                  By the way Fairfax, the most recent statistics I found say that 40,000 head of cattle are tested for BSE (mad cow disease) each year of of 90 million head and about 40 million slaughtered each year. That's about 0.1%.

                                  Comment


                                  • Originally posted by Bluey View Post
                                    You think so?
                                    Guess that if you were on my side you would agree I had some believable facts there.
                                    That may make a difference, why I don't think some are as much on the fence as they pretend.


                                    How about the "other" side, just finally caught paying $100,000+ to lie about abuse in the circus?

                                    I say THAT is being caught playing fast and loose with the truth.
                                    WOW! So if we dont' believe every word you say, esp. with it doesn't sound logical, we must be "on the other side" and just pretending?

                                    And two wrongs don't make a right, Bluey. Yes, they played loose and fast and got caught...what does that have to do with what you are stating? Nothing, unless you are trying to state you were playing loose and fast, too, but it's okay because that's how the other side operates.

                                    Cripes, I am on "your" side as far as allowing horse slaughter, but if you are going to keep posting like that, you may do "your" side more harm than good.
                                    And as someone whose brother has worked in slaughter plants, testing every animal unless there is a large problem (such as repeated violations/a pissed off customer) makes "0" sense. But instead of accepting that maybe your source was incorrect or exagerating, or there was another reason for it, you insinuate that anyone that questions the logic without more info must be sllllloooowwwww.

                                    I don't know if you truly understand how you come across sometimes, Bluey.

                                    Comment


                                    • Originally posted by JGHIRETIRE View Post
                                      We have the right to safe food. You know as well as I do they cut corners everywhere.
                                      Just like expecting good healthcare, you don't ask your doctor to run all tests known to man when so much out there is not even on the radar but as a very rare possibility.

                                      The same with our food, that is where protocols come in, to catch most of what it can affect that one produce and not all that is out there that could affect it.

                                      Not even forgetting that once bought, some contamination happens on the way home, how it is stored, while preparing it or being improperly prepared and stored until eaten.

                                      There is a time where you have to say that is enough, because there is no such thing as perfection, as in perfectly safe food.

                                      That is not saying that we don't have and don't try to keep improving, just that it is a process in transition and not perfect.

                                      Comment


                                      • Originally posted by Bluey View Post
                                        Just like expecting good healthcare, you don't ask your doctor to run all tests known to man when so much out there is not even on the radar but as a very rare possibility.

                                        The same with our food, that is where protocols come in, to catch most of what it can affect that one produce and not all that is out there that could affect it.

                                        Not even forgetting that once bought, some contamination happens on the way home, how it is stored, while preparing it or being improperly prepared and stored until eaten.

                                        There is a time where you have to say that is enough, because there is no such thing as perfection, as in perfectly safe food.

                                        That is not saying that we don't have and don't try to keep improving, just that it is a process in transition and not perfect.
                                        Bluey, that's not what you said. You said every horse was tested. Every. That means 100%. For residue (although you declined to say what residue.)

                                        I don't think horse meat picks up bute on the way home from the store, do you?

                                        Comment


                                        • Originally posted by MoonoverMississippi View Post
                                          WOW! So if we dont' believe every word you say, esp. with it doesn't sound logical, we must be "on the other side" and just pretending?

                                          And two wrongs don't make a right, Bluey. Yes, they played loose and fast and got caught...what does that have to do with what you are stating? Nothing, unless you are trying to state you were playing loose and fast, too, but it's okay because that's how the other side operates.

                                          Cripes, I am on "your" side as far as allowing horse slaughter, but if you are going to keep posting like that, you may do "your" side more harm than good.
                                          And as someone whose brother has worked in slaughter plants, testing every animal unless there is a large problem (such as repeated violations/a pissed off customer) makes "0" sense. But instead of accepting that maybe your source was incorrect or exagerating, or there was another reason for it, you insinuate that anyone that questions the logic without more info must be sllllloooowwwww.

                                          I don't know if you truly understand how you come across sometimes, Bluey.
                                          Look, I don't know where your brother worked, but in the Dallas plant, as per people working there over the years, several of them, that is what they said they were doing and why.
                                          So did some inspectors.

                                          Tell me, why is it wrong to say that is what I know and why, take it as you wish?

                                          Yes, two wrongs don't make a right, but that was a pertinent example of someone lying, was I not clear?
                                          I am not lying as accused, as already explained many times, I just state what I know and where from and you are free to believe it or not.

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X