var json_comments = new Array("
\"user-pic\"
fonetek
January 29, 2009 3:21 AM
Moderate | Flag for review

Nuts...

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
Blueskylaw
January 29, 2009 3:31 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@fonetek:

General Anthony Clement McAuliffe (July 2, 1898 - August 11, 1975) was the United States Army general who commanded the defending 101st Airborne troops during the Battle of Bastogne, Belgium, during the Battle of the Bulge in World War II. He is famous for his single-word reply to a German surrender ultimatum: \"Nuts!\"

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
ceez
January 29, 2009 3:25 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

my goodness.....why do we have such organizations?!?! they are all useless!!


I think we start paying all those bigwigs lessmoney so they can focus more on what their organizations are supposed to be doing.


soon I can see infomercials in africa \"please sponsor an american, they have salmonela and other diseases which their countries many organizations failed to perform their duties examining their foods\"!!!

Reply
5 replies
\"user-pic\"
glycolized
January 30, 2009 3:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ceez: I believe that part of the whole deal is that we've been starving these public safety organizations for years now. There are far fewer inspectors for domestic and imported food than 10-15 years ago. A knee-jerk response of 'why are we even paying for this' is why we're in the jam we are in now. Manufacturers have been trying to get the government to minimize oversight and inspection for years, and to a certain extent, have been successful.

It's everywhere. Fewer cops and firefighters, fewer FDA inspectors, fewer financial regulators, fewer public health services. This is what you get doing government \"on the cheap\".

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Ingram81
January 29, 2009 2:11 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ceez: And people want the Federal Government to be in charge of things like their health care and retirement.

They cant even make sure we don't eat food tainted with poo.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Sarcasmo - employed and online
January 29, 2009 3:54 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Ingram81: this is what happens when politicians are more concerned with a lobby group than their constituents!

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Ingram81
January 29, 2009 4:05 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Sarcasmo: Do you honestly think that will ever change? I mean I'm all for living in a ideological world. Politicians on the whole are whores, its just that most of them are good at covering it up. I'm not going on a Left or Right thing either, its across the board.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Plates
January 29, 2009 4:30 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Ingram81: There are two big problems with the American system - the Republicans and the Democrats!

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Con Seannery blames Facebook for the recession
January 29, 2009 4:50 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ceez: The problem is the companies were not required to disclose test results by state law so that they would actually DO THE TESTS. Never mind that they could just mandate reported testing like every other area has. The food industry lobby is powerful, indeed.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Plates
January 29, 2009 4:44 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ceez: We have such organizations so that politicians can cover their asses and give out patronage. Mostly these are pension factories.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
dirtleg
January 29, 2009 3:26 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Lying, criminal activity for cash return, shopping for favorable research results. Sounds like these guys are angling for some bailout money.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
Inglix_the_Mad
January 29, 2009 3:53 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@dirtleg:

Sounds more like a case of Enterprise Corruption. Start applying RICO laws, and at least we'll have the joy of making them broke.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Blueskylaw
January 29, 2009 3:26 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

And the lab they don't normally use didn't wonder why all of a sudden they got a \"rush\" job saying please deliver me acceptable results and you will be well remunerated?
Did they think they would be able to spin their way off the poison train?

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
cromartie
January 29, 2009 3:26 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

It's nice to know it isn't only the Chinese that do this, isn't it?

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
No,Comma_GitEmSteveDave
January 29, 2009 11:39 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@cromartie: These guys are probably thanking their stars their not in China, as the milk guys got death.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
shemnon
January 29, 2009 3:32 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

The executive who pushed for the second set of results should be put on trial for murder. Maybe not first degree, but second or third for sure.

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
Enduro
January 29, 2009 3:49 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@shemnon: I agree 100%. These executives should earn their inflated salaries and be accountable for their action.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
oneliketadow
January 29, 2009 4:42 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@shemnon: 2nd degree, wreckless indifference (disregard) for human life, and that also applies to anyone who knew about it and didn't stop it.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
t-r0y
January 29, 2009 4:11 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@oneliketadow: Hear! Hear! Including the 2nd laboratory!

Maybe the 2nd lab can't be held responsible (incompetence, poor standards), but if they can prove willful disregard for safety standards, then they need to be accountable too!

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
humphrmi
January 29, 2009 3:36 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I have only this to say to whoever at Peanut Corporation of America is responsible for taking their products to different labs to get an acceptable result:

Be glad you don't work in China, where they send your next of kin a bill for the bullet they put in the back of your head.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
Aeroracere
January 29, 2009 4:17 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@humphrmi: Seriously; they're lucky they aren't in China... they'd be given the same treatment.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Kaisum
January 29, 2009 3:41 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

That \"Federal Probe\" is probably looking into their bank accounts to see if they can afford to get away with this through legal loop holes. Or a penis.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
Ingram81
January 29, 2009 2:13 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Kaisum: What does having a penis have anything to do with it?

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
ColoradoShark
January 29, 2009 4:18 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I might forgive them if they didn't know.
These guys knew there was salmonella and shipped anyway.
Maybe they should \"share a cell\" with the Chinese guys who knowingly shipped milk with melamine.

In case you don't know, the Chinese guys will only be staying their cell a really short time until they are executed.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
floraposte
January 29, 2009 2:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ColoradoShark: Two of them are going to be executed, two more of them aren't, and of course considerably more people were involved who haven't been tried.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Adam2010
January 29, 2009 4:25 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

For some sad reason I'm not surprised. It seems to me that the Federal government does a great job catching these things, \"after the fact\". Just like that kooky Bernard and his $50 Billion scheme. Again our stellar Federal government did a great job investigating that one \"after the fact\". Like Shemnon said, China has sentenced two men to death and a bunch more to life in prison for that baby formula bull s*** it's sad when we don't hold those who we trust accountable.

Reply
4 replies
\"user-pic\"
FreeShaggy
January 29, 2009 1:47 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Adam2010: Blame it all on the FDA. Their too small to do good.


In an ideal world, there would be an FDA advisor for every single plant animal and mineral that is being produced for human (maybe even anythings) consumption.


But in the real world, all they can do is create acts and try to enforce their rules as best they can, and hope that the possibility of being brought up on serious criminal charges is enough to deter shipping a contaminated product.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
the lesser of two weevils
January 29, 2009 11:36 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Adam2010: Our government has been playing catch up for years. It took 9/11 and 3000 people dead for our intelligence agencies to be looked at seriously and overhauled, Katrina for FEMA to be straightened out, the recession for better financial oversight and now this (we can only hope, considering we've been through outbreaks like this before ie: spinach a few years back). It's like the roof caves in and we stand there saying \"yep, 'bout time to patch that up.\"

Reply
\"user-pic\"
perruptor
January 29, 2009 2:13 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Sarcasmic: Actually, our government has been playing \"fall behind\" for many years, with the continuously decreasing regulation of the food industry started by Reagan. Now, for instance, the handful of beef inspectors who still go to meat packing plants are instructed to be damned sure that what they see on the meat is actually feces before they order the conveyor stopped. If they can't produce some shit, they're on the hook for the packer's downtime. Food inspection used to be much more rigorous and effective.

Allowing food producers to voluntarily test for and enforce purity is exactly the same as hiring the fox to watch the henhouse.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Telekinesis123
January 29, 2009 4:27 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Reprehensible and criminal, nothing else.

The only action of themselves from this could have been the death of others.

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Gaambit
January 29, 2009 5:00 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

God, it's like a peanut-version of \"The Jungle\" down there...

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
magic8ball
January 29, 2009 5:14 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

How is this kind of activity even remotely legal?

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
P_Smith
January 29, 2009 6:59 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@magic8ball: Bush legalized putting more arsenic and other pollutants into the environment, and changed the laws on the FDA's drug testing.


Take a wild guess.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
kbrook
January 29, 2009 5:30 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I'm starving, and was thinking about a peanut butter sandwich. This story pretty much killed that urge! And yes, I know that peanut butter in jars (jarred?) isn't affected. I'm still grossed out.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
HogwartsAlum
January 29, 2009 3:44 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@kbrook:

I have a sandwich in my inbox right now...I still want to eat it.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
ichibanjay
January 29, 2009 5:47 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I'm wondering if convicted, the person responsible would be charged with a death sentence like in China? More likely than not they will just be slapped on the wrist.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
orlo
January 30, 2009 12:12 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ichibanjay: They should absolutely be charged with 1st degree murder since some people died from eating their PB. If allowed in the jurisdiction the where charges are brought, the death penalty should be on the table. But you're right, the law doesn't apply to everyone

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
TechnoDestructo
January 29, 2009 6:08 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

RIPPED FROM THE HEADLINES, An all new episode of Law and Order!

(This is pretty similar to one from a few years ago, actually)

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
microguy07828
January 29, 2009 6:22 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

As someone who has worked in Industrial Microbiology for over 16 years, I can tell you that the situation described here happens more often than you would think.


The main goal of any manufacturing plant is to get the product out the door, so that they can get paid by their customer. Some manufacturing plants will do whatever they can to get microbiologically failing product to market and cover their butts in the process. From my experience, some of the most common tricks dishonest manufacturers try to pull are as follows.


1) Test to Compliance - Microbiological contamination is often not evenly distributed throughout a product. That means that it is possible that if you retest a sample, test another container or another part of the batch, you may not pick up the objectionable organism. If you are testing for overall bacterial or fungal count, it is possible the count on the retest may be lower. Some companies with failing products will continue to send in samples of the same product until they get passing data. They then destroy all of the failing data and are left with a lab report showing that their product is acceptable.


2) Combining Failing Batches with Passing Batches - If a batch is failing for overall bacteria or fungal count, some companies will blend the failing product into passing product to dilute the microbiological contamination to acceptable levels. Lot numbers for the product are then altered to cover their tracks. They then destroy all of the failing data and are left with a lab report showing that their product is microbiologically acceptable.


3) They Purposely Mislabel Samples - If a product fails microbiological testing, some companies will remove the failing product from the sample package and substitute passing product. Now the sample that is sent to the lab has the failing product's lot number on it, but the sample material inside is passing product. Once the testing is complete, the company receives a lab report showing that the failing product passed testing. They then destroy all of the failing data and are left with a lab report showing that their product is acceptable.


4) They Use a Different Laboratory - All contract microbiology laboratories are not created equal. They run the gamut from a state-of-the-art building with tens of thousands of square feet of work space to a mom and pop operation operating in a two room suite in an office complex. The quality of work these laboratories perform and the reliability of data they produce can vary greatly. If a product is failing at one laboratory, some manufacturers will just send their samples to other laboratories until they get results that they like. The big question is always \"Does the manufacturer want the best quality data or do they want passing data?\" The truthful answer is that it depends on the customer.


5) They Use Their \"Alternate\" Laboratory - If I told you that there were microbiology laboratories out in the world that accepts samples, never tests them and then issues passing reports, would you believe it?


6) They Mislead Their Microbiology Laboratory - Sometimes companies will request that their microbiology laboratory change lot numbers on reports, claiming they mistakenly wrote incorrect lot numbers on the incoming sample submission sheets. The microbiology laboratory may innocently and unknowingly provide documentation that allows failing product to ship.


7) They Bully the Microbiology Laboratory - Sometimes manufacturers with failing product request that the microbiology laboratory provide them with a report indicating passing data. Sometimes they remind the laboratory of how much revenue they generate for them. They even may threaten to pull their business is the microbiology laboratory refuses to comply. Money can be a powerful motivator.


8) They Find Another Laboratory - If the microbiology laboratory a manufacturer is using refuses to cave in and help them cover their tracks, the manufacturer may just find another laboratory that will \"play ball\" with them.


Now my disclaimer: What I have listed above represents my opinion and experience. The vast majority of manufacturers and microbiology laboratories are honest and work hard to do the right things. However, money is a powerful motivator. With product batches that can be worth tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars, some rouge companies will do whatever they can to prevent product loss. Some are even willing to put the health and well-being of the public at risk.


I do not mean in any way to imply that The Peanut Corporation of America engaged in any type of wrongdoing. Everyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty. I have no doubt that the FDA will determine the root cause of this situation and take any necessary corrective action.

Reply
4 replies
\"user-pic\"
orlo
January 30, 2009 12:15 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@microguy07828: If money is important, it's kind of short-sighted to kill your customers. Maybe the FDA should provide some reimbursement for contaminated batches, although I'm sure the companies would then start intentionally contaminating them

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Tiber
January 29, 2009 3:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@microguy07828: My question is, why are they even allowed to re-take the test until they pass? This isn't high school, and there's no extra credit. The FDA should be notified the first time a test is ever failed. Failure to so should be a criminal offense.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
the lesser of two weevils
January 29, 2009 11:42 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@microguy07828: There really needs to be a UL type seal of approval for food safety testing. If an electric appliance has the UL seal we generally can assume it's not going to burst into flames. Either some of these labs should band together to implement this type of strict rating system or the government needs to try it out.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
magnoliasouth
February 13, 2009 7:19 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Sarcasmic: No thanks. I'm not interested in paying more for peanut butter just because of some seal of approval. It won't safeguard anything. There will still be corruption in management and it'll still happen again and again.

The only way to (hopefully) deter it is to lock him up and throw away the key.

Personally, I'd be willing to give the owner the death penalty. An eye for an eye.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
papahoth
January 29, 2009 6:48 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

The FDA under George Bush -- another example of how to wreck the government and feed at the trough.

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
magnoliasouth
February 13, 2009 7:17 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@papahoth: Oh sure. Like more regulations will stop it? It won't stop this kind of thing. The government cannot ever stop criminals no matter what you do.

The only way to stop criminals, is get rid of them.

More regulations is only going to raise prices. Do you think for a second that the owner is willing to take the extra costs out of his profit? If so, you're dreaming.

Yeah, blame it on Bush. He has control like the Gods of the universe.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Ingram81
January 29, 2009 2:17 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@papahoth: Yay! My first troll sighting of the day!

Reply
\"user-pic\"
yagisencho
January 29, 2009 7:39 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@papahoth:


It didn't begin with the Bush administration, but the willful neglect under their watch is damning enough.

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Allen Harkleroad
January 29, 2009 9:56 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Maybe we should be allowed to force feed the executive and employees of PCA some of the tainted peanut butter...

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
Ingram81
January 29, 2009 2:17 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Allen Harkleroad: Maybe we should put peanut butter on our taints and have them lick it...

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
f3rg
January 29, 2009 11:00 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

They knowingly shipped tainted products, and in return, 5 people died. All those involved in making the decisions--including those who gave them the \"acceptable\" results they were fishing for--should be tried for manslaughter.

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
bohemian
January 29, 2009 12:38 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

The extent that food oversight has been deregulated and left to the companies to \"self police\" during Bush's reign was significant. The FDA was gutted and policies were changed. If it was lacking before it was on its knees after Bush got his hands involved.

The people who were involved in this at Peanut Corp. need to be brought up on murder or at least manslaughter and fraud charges. They also need to seize all personal and business assets to use to pay victims. I generally am offended by how the Chinese deal with crime but in light of the Peanut Corp case I am warming up to the idea.

Ironically after we quit eating at restaurants and cut out almost all processed food, neither of us have had a case of food poisoning or even a minor bout of GI issues.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
hypochondriac
January 29, 2009 1:11 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I really hope the Suits that decided to get the product rechecked get charged murder/manslaughter charges.

The company should be sued into bankruptcy. Which idiot decided to let companies be responsible for their own testing? Haven't they heard of conflict of interest?

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
James DeWitt
January 29, 2009 1:56 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

LL @ fntk

nkng fts

Reply
","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
segfault
January 29, 2009 2:59 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

And the USDA is no different than the FDA. The USDA won't allow companies to voluntarily test for mad cow disease because they think there will be rioting in the streets if consumers are allowed to buy beef which has been specifically screened for mad cow disease.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
LabanDenter
January 29, 2009 3:01 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I know, We should Shop Labs, so that all products fail.

We should have a 'We Fail U Lab'. Then we would have no products on the market, because well, none pass.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
radiochief
January 29, 2009 3:10 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

microguy07828 is totally correct.

When I got my first job out of college in 1991 (and my second), I did food micro for 5 years. I worked at one of the most reputable independent laboratories in the country (in their micro lab).

All private labs have to follow specific gov't/independent agency guidelines for what product they are testing. These may include: FDA, USDA, APHA, USP and AOAC procedures. These labs are subject to federal inspections and also state inspections/certifications at somewhat regular intervals.

It is much easier for a client to manipulate what samples are brought to testing rather than a independent laboratory fudging data. Payment to laboratories is based whatever hourly charge the company rates the job and tech doing it at. So, really there is not a lot incentive to manipulate data. Internal micro labs- yes. External- no.

It is possible that this could happen, but with testing laboratories, your reputation is all you have. A smaller, hole-in-the-wall lab maybe. But not a large multi-disciplinary laboratory.

It is truly sad that this has happened. Because an issue like could really happen by circumstances. Someone in production does not clean the CIP line properly or some combines the last of an old batch with a new batch. Unfortunately, people really can die because of this. I know I take my position at my present lab seriously, because people will die if I do my job incorrectly.

I am in public health now.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
picardia
January 29, 2009 3:21 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Every time some crazed Objectivist wants to scream about how regulations are going to create Ayn Rand's world, I want to point to things like this and go, THIS is Ayn Rand's world. Except that, unlike her fantasy novels, real capitalists do not strive for all that is good and provide fine products that reflect their inner nobility. Unchecked, they provide cars that explode and peanut butter that's poison.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
savdavid
January 29, 2009 3:25 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

See how good free enterprise is when left all to itself? Free Enterprise assumes all individuals are good people, interested in their customers and business reputation. NOT SO! That is why we need to have some government oversight to protect us. It cost money, yes, but it will cost more in the long run if we don't. It will cost everyone (including business) in recalls, profits, sickness, sick days and death if we don't invest in government protections.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
HogwartsAlum
January 29, 2009 3:48 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@savdavid:

Well said. It's clear that an all-or-nothing approach to regulation doesn't work either way. If regs are too tight that hurts businesses and if they are too loose or non-existent, that hurts consumers.

We need to find a happy medium here.

Reply
","","","","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
3drage
January 29, 2009 4:40 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

It's a shame this company wasn't in China, they have ways of taking care of these types of people.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
microguy07828
January 29, 2009 4:47 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Manufacturers are not allowed to retest a product until the sample passes, then discard the failing data.


Once a sample fails, numerous re-samples must be submitted to determine the validity of the initial test. The number of re-samples may be based on batch size, quantity of finished product containers, determined using a mathematical formula or some other method. There can be many factors involved.


In any case, once a sample fails a manufacturer should reference their \"Out-of-Specification Procedure\". This procedure should have been developed before the company ever opened its doors for business. The procedure should describe how many re-samples must be tested and list corrective action, among other things. OOS procedures can be dozens of pages long, describing in detail every action that must be taken.


Once failing data is received or a product has been determined to be contaminated, there should not be 8 department leaders in a room scratching their heads, trying to figure out what to do. Detailed procedures should have been developed by qualified individuals long in advance that describe corrective action to be taken when incidents occur.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
trujunglist
January 29, 2009 7:12 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Wow, I can't believe the audacity of these scum bags. People have died because of these fools and they need to face the consequences of their actions. I'm sure that they will get off without any penalties too, when they should really be injected with salmonella.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
starrion
January 29, 2009 10:21 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Time for the Corporate Death Sentence?


It put the Fear of God into the accounting industry when they administratively \"executed\" Arthur Anderson.


Perhaps if a couple of malfeasant companies are put down we'll get a \"pour encourager les autres\" effect.

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
FoxCMK
January 30, 2009 4:33 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

More proof that the FDA is a dangerous organization - giving false hope to clueless Americans that their consumables are actually safe.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
February 6, 2009 6:49 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Let PCA know what you think...

Name Phone / Fax Email
Stewart Parnell
President
Phone 434-384-7098
Fax 434-384-9528
stewparnell@peanutcorp.com
Gloria Parnell
Corp. Office Mgr
Phone 434-384-7098
Fax 434-384-9528
gbparnell@aol.com
Grey Adams
Accounts Mgr
Phone 434-384-7098
Fax 434-384-9528
greyadams@peanutcorp.com
David Voth
Sales Director
Phone 434-384-7098
Fax 434-384-9528
davidvoth@peanutcorp.com

Blakely, Georgia Facility
Name

Phone / Fax

Email
Danny Kilgore
Manager, Blakely
Phone 229-723-3411
Fax 229-723-5130
dkilgore@peanutcorp.com
Peggie Harper
Office Mgr, Blakely
Phone 229-723-3411
Fax 229-723-5130
pharper@peanutcorp.com
Jeff McFay
QC Mgr, Blakely
Phone 229-723-3411
Fax 229-723-5130
jeffmcfay@peanutcorp.com

Suffolk, Virginia Facility
Name

Phone / Fax

Email
Ryan Williams
Manager, Suffolk
Phone 757-539-0221
Fax 757-539-3866
ryanwms@peanutcorp.com

Plainview Peanut Company
Opening late 2004
Name
Phone / Fax
Email
Jim Booher
Manager, Plainview
Phone 806-288-0300
Fax 806-288-0301
jimbooher@peanutcorp.com

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
February 8, 2009 1:30 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I vote we take the Chinese example of dealing with this. Those who endanger the public health and cause death and sickness should be tried and executed for murder.Then as stated earlier send the bill for the execution to thier relatives.This would include all agencies responsable for this inexcuseable situation. Someone needs to pay the price for thier greed!

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
February 10, 2009 10:14 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Isnt it amazing all the ways that true evil presents itself to us.Its one thing when you dont realize until after the fact that somethiing may be tainted. But to knowingly allow something which if often fatal into the food chain is TOTALLY EVIL.The company should be put out of business. And all responsible government officiials who were asleep on the job should be terminated.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
February 11, 2009 1:28 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Seems that the magic of the market is flawlessly at work.Maybe one of these days, it will be clear to all that ifprofits are all people running companies care about, thenanything goes if they can get away with it. I am notgenerally approving of the death penalty, but it seemsto me that a long term in prison for the people whodid this would be ok. They would have a lot oftime to consider where it was they left theirhumanity. The common excuse aside from pureunadulterated greed would be that the shareholders(private or public) demand very high returns. Thatsounds to me like the common excuse in post-NaziGermany - I was just following orders.

ICK ...

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
pegr
February 12, 2009 9:39 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

\"Be glad you don't work in China, where they send your next of kin a bill for the bullet they put in the back of your head.\"


That's a silly, untrue rumor! The bullet is actually free!

Reply
","","");