On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 19:12:52 GMT, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>Derek wrote:
>> On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 18:20:44 GMT, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>>But that didn't stop you from altering his alleged email
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>No substantive alteration.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>So you ADMIT you DID alter it,
>>>>>
>>>>>Only to take my real e-mail address out of it.
>>>>
>>>>The part you altered was the informational part of it
>>>>and had nothing to do with hiding your identity, liar.
>>>
>>>The only thing I altered was the removal of my e-mail
>>>address.
>>
>> The part you admittedly altered in the second alleged email
>
>The only thing altered was the removal of my e-mail
>address.

That's a blatant and repeated lie, and easily shown by
looking at the original and comparing it to the second
which you admittedly altered after claiming Sessions
wrote them both.

The part you admittedly altered in the second alleged email
had nothing to do with hiding your identity at all. It was the
informational part of the email that you altered, yet you're
now claiming that that altered email is but one of two. I can't
be, since you've admitted altering it and then presented it as
the original again.

According to you, the informational part of his brief email
went;

"The marketing claim standards are still under
review by USDA. Accordingly, the standards
have not been published in a final form for use."

but now reads;

"A revised grass-fed marketing claim is under
development by USDA. Any grass-fed marketing
claim proposed by USDA will be published with
a public comment period."

Here's the claimed original email;

From: "Sessions, William" >
To: <jonball@[...]>

Mr. Ball: Thanks for your message. The marketing claim
standards are still under review by USDA. Accordingly,
the standards have not been published in a final form for
use. I hope this information is helpful. Please let me know
if further information is needed. Thanks,

William T. Sessions
Associate Deputy Administrator
Livestock and Seed Program
http://tinyurl.com/dkdxo

and here's your edited copy;

Mr. Ball: Thanks for your message. A revised
grass-fed marketing claim is under development by
USDA. Any grass-fed marketing claim proposed by
USDA will be published with a public comment period.
I hope this information is helpful. Please let me
know if further information is needed. Thanks,

William T. Sessions
Associate Deputy Administrator
Livestock and Seed Program
http://tinyurl.com/9m9cz

Both emails start with,

"Mr. Ball: Thanks for your message."

and end with

"I hope this information is helpful. Please let me know
if further information is needed.
Thanks,

William T. Sessions
Associate Deputy Administrator
Livestock and Seed Program"

How could you be so stupid as to try a stunt like that
and think you could get away with it, and how many
times are you going to ignore this solid evidence against
you by snipping it all away and insisting that the only
part you altered was your email address? This is the
most pathetic charade I've seen you go through after
being caught lying.

Derek lied:
> On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 19:12:52 GMT, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>

They're feeding it grass - 100%

aisa wrote:
> I suppose my point was that it is disgusting to feed animal matter to
> cows

It's not a new practice. Farmers have long fed by-products to other
animals. City slickers are always appalled by reality, but that's the
price they pay for believing that the "real world" consists of bright
fluorescent lighting showing very clean cuts of meat on styrofoam with a
little absorbent pad beneath to soak up blood and protected by a shiny
film of plastic.

> and even more disgusting to process human corpses and put them
> into our food chain.

Yet you have no evidence that this has indeed occurred. The Colchesters
admit their theory is circumstantial. You have no grounds for suggesting
that their circumstantial theory is factual, no matter how plausible it
may be or seem.

> I must say I feel prion disease may have come from
> chemical sprays.

That's among the least likely theories. Working against it is the fact
that many TSEs pre-date the development and use of chemical sprays.

> I am sorry to come off of your point but it is important to not trust
> the powers that be

You question authority. I question those who question authority.