Some critics say HSUS has a secret “vegan agenda” — that it wants to take our steaks away. As a meat lover, and a smoker, and a person who likes smoked meats, I say, even if that were the case, so what? The animals I eat deserve a spokesperson.
Secret Agenda? No secret.
Remember Readin', Ritin', and Ritmatic? Those are the three Rs that are the basis of an old time education, of course.
HSUS and Animal Welfare Information Center (AWIC) each have published versions of their own three Rs.
First see Animal Welfare's (via AWIC's) point of view as it refers to the use of animals in science. Science is dear to my heart as is microbiology, aspects of clinical medical technology and research. I've worked in clinical medicine, grown many types of microorganisms and am familiar with animal components as used in a scientific diagnostic laboratory.
USDA's, AWIC has a presentation on their version of the three Rs' which seeks to educate scientists on ways to minimize animal use or harm to animals in order to meet animal welfare standards. Find it on the page above... Under WORKSHOPS /and then/ WORKSHOP MATERIALS. From a PDF slide show. The three R's mentioned are.
* Reduction -Minimize the number of animals used.
* Refinement -Employ techniques that reduce pain and distress.
* Replacement -Substitute animal with nonanimal methods or lower organisms.
NOW... Wayne Pacelle/HSUS mentions three Rs in a blog entry:
We believe in the Three Rs [my formatting below]
* reducing the consumption of meat and other animal-based foods;
* refining the diet by eating products only from methods of production, transport, and slaughter that minimize pain and distress;and
* replacing meat and other animal-based foods in the diet with plant-based foods.
It's no secret.
Here's another NonSecret, there is absolutely NO such thing as avegan.
I'm constantly amazed at the number of otherwise well informed people (and bloggers) who think the HSUS is...well, what they pretend to be. I do believe the light of truth is beginning to shine on them.
This legislative session in California has really been a PAIN. We have a little problem in that California spends money like a bimbo and creates legislation to force compliance with any number of Politically Correct fads and hairbrained schemes without considering the collateral damage to businesses and farms. Additionally the voting population is not really involved with their own government. I guess we all like to believe that there are checks and balances and that our Constitution will prevail. If you are suspicious, you must be a tin foil hatter. Anyway, California is paying for these sins, left and right, and YET... while we are dealing with these mistakes, our pathetic government continues to pass more pork because of ideas that 'sound good' to the citizens.
If you want to cut right to the chase and do stuff about this bill, go here, a google document page where I have placed essential contact information and instructions on what to do.
The mandatory spay and neuter bill is one such idiot package. SB 250 is our current reincarnation of AB 1634 which did not pass last year when our legislators found the bill to be fundamentally flawed. However the people anxious to pass the bill are trying again. It does NOT work. It will be a disaster for our farms and for millions of dollars income for the state. Furthermore, the premise of the bill presents a false problem and presents an equally false solution! Charts from saveourdogs.com -click to enlarge See SAVE OUR DOGS for detail and more issues about Mandatory Spay and Neuter (MSN)
Why are some places passing this bill? In Los Angeles, it passed because the promoters flippantly stated (LIES) as if it were fact that Santa Cruz's problems would be helped with MSN. But as you can see from the chart, they are an unmitigated FAIL. Additionally, since Los Angeles willingly used false info to get the bill passed, they too have increased kills and are not solving their original problem. The first step in solving a problem is to correctly identify it.
The hydra strategy....... The thing is now, the MSN groups are undaunted with their total failures. They seem to think that their failure is not due to them analyzing their problem but is due to all other people that do not have MSN. Thus, they have multiplied their 'divide and conquer' strategy; it resembles the life form known as a hydra. They have chopped up the bigger goals so that the smaller pieces can pass first and like that hydra, the small bits rebuild into a monster. The multiple bills come together after passage, with many complicated ordinances that can be much worse than the original big bill because the smaller ones are amended further and include even more invasive bits tacked onto them.
Read the news and you will see this in action--HSUS lobbyists go to the legislators of other states and say "your state is behind on animal care issues; this and that bill passed in California and other states." This makes legislators think it's really "by the people" since the other states were 'won' and they become convinced that HSUS represents mainstream thought. This is beyond disingenuous, but this is what they are doing.
HSUS and others in the extremist groups discuss this strategy to educate their peers in how successful it is and get sleepy little towns with their boards of supervisors swinging happily from imaginary "progressive" monkey vines.
JQP becomes part of the problem as they sit back and let these laws be enacted without seeing the need for checks and balance.
Anyway, a great post was on another of the forums I read, so I will copy bits of it here. Some of this material is revived from when we were fighting AB 1634.
It estimated* the benefit dogs give to California ranchers at *about *$140 million.* Add to that about *$1.3 million* boosting local economies by *herding trial exhibitors.*
The AKC conducts ongoing research regarding the economic benefits of our events, and our estimates conclude that these exhibitors contributed approximately *$92 million* to local California economies.
Registries such as AKC (American Kennel Club) and CFA (Cat Fanciers of America) conduct ongoing research regarding the economic benefits of our events, and their estimates conclude that these exhibitors contribute nearly 100 million annually to local California economies. This is the contribution from dog and cat shows and does not include the money spent on vets, groomers, handlers, supplies, pet food, etc.
* So far, this looks like AKC dog shows, CFA cat shows, herding trials and working ranch dogs contribute at least $233.3 million to California's economy every year. * This doesn't include hunting trials and other canine performance events including Schutzhund events, sighthound courses, UKC or ARBA dog shows, etc.
Senate Bill 250 is the linchpin on which all the other HSUS-backed radical animal rights bills depend. Sen. Florez -thinks California can afford to lose these animals, their genetics and their owners? In addition to the *$65 million lost by Long Beach* when AKC cancelled the Eukanuba contract a couple of months ago?
See SAVE OUR DOGS (on Twitter)/web for more updates. See True Agendas (on Twitter)/web for frequently updated brief details.
Trying to keep track of where all the time goes is just impossible these days. I've certainly had a lot of distractions.
Yummy stuff. Dragon Boat Festival is coming up soon (June 8). Mom doesn't cook any more so her vegetarian or traditional version of zongzi will not happen this year. I did find a page with a pretty classic version of zongzi, and am really happy with the find. Google images of this traditional Chinese food stimulates the appetite for me! :) Of course, it's a pretty huge undertaking (like making homemade tamales but since they are bigger servings, goes quicker) so I'll be trying to find a local place where I can pick some up premade.
Something new to me that I learned this month came by way of Marlene in an email where she mentioned chicken diapers. I had to find a site that featured them to learn more about this oddity and now it doesn't really seem that odd. Chicken diapers allow chickens to kept as house pets. Chickens do make really sweet affectionate companions, except for the occasional rooster from heck (they can get dangerous if they are unpredictable and aggressive, especially if their spurs are long an untrimmed). Some roosters have very nice personalities. If you do not have a good ratio of hens to roosters, your hens will get rather bedraggled; the roosters are pretty randy guys. My chickens have always been livestock and live outside except for that period of time that they need to be under the heat lamp--new peepers from the post office are always exciting! A sick or injured bird however, would be kept in the house, in a cat crate where I could give it attention through the day. It's so easy to imagine making a house pet of one. Imagine a pet rooster waking you up from your headboard in the morning. No snooze button? Maybe some corn scattered on the floor! And you get a few eggs a week from your hen, but if she has no nest, every day could be an Easter egg hunt. :)
HSUS was pretty interesting in the recent week. A stable link to the WSB exposé on HSUS is here. It's been quite an eye opener to see the obsessive levels to which censorship can happen.
Other finds this week. The Library of Congress has some famous and interesting photos on its own Flickr account. From a pit bull chat forum, I learned about this beautiful blog where a man travels on his bike with his pit bull who rides a sidecar. They have beautiful photography there. Check it out, Ara and Spirit's blog, The Oasis of My Soul.
A really funny video. I always wince when it looks like people are getting hurt, but overall, I really had a good laugh with this one. :)
I've had a Twitter account for many months but didn't make much use of it. I've found it very handy for following issues in legislation, foodie blogs, posts about science, agriculture, my breed, genetics, games, humor, photography, news, photo editing and seriously, all manner of other things that interest me. I've added a sidebar to this blog that shows my latest 'tweets' and connects to my Twitter profile.
Helmut at the beach with a Great Dane. (pic from earlier this year, via Geno) It's just always great to see happy pics and good news about dogs. :)
'Animal Wrongs' seems to be a better and more accurate phrase than 'Animal Rights' as practiced by HSUS, PeTA and other supporters, including some local animal shelters. Lots of reports suggesting reform abound, but they are still killing pets as they see fit and making it difficult for pet lovers to keep their rights. Seems counter intuitive regarding 'humane' organizations but until reform happens, we still have quite a fight at hand.
CA AB1122: WHY HSUS DOESN’T WANT “TRANSFERS” OF ANIMALS April 19, 2009 How does HSUS Work Against Pets+Owners?
HSUS passes laws (HSUS has almost 200 laws for this year) then uses those laws for cases it plans to bring forward, then uses those cases in their incremental process to bring down both interstate commerce and pet ownership, kennels, pet stores, dog breeders, along with difficulties for agriculture and other animals.
We can guarantee that the CA Prop 2 (battery cages) will come back to haunt us in pet ownership, or farming. HSUS will probably find some other ways to outlaw farm animals or make a huge problem for farming–after all HSUS right NOW is trying to outlaw all “non-native” species including birds, herps,guineas,ferrets, turtles and many other common species in the USA that have been owned for 50-100 years.
Ownership in the law, is of the highest legal nature, and as a concept, usually means the ultimate control over the item owned. It also usually refers to having the control legally over such item (property) and also the right to use it for as long as is allowed in the law, and in many instances, to bring a lawsuit where the owner’s rights are affected. Guardianship does NOT necessarily mean any of the same things, which is why animal rights prefers it over “owner.”
CA law has statutes that show one of the main incidents of ownership in property, is the right to TRANSFER it (Bias v Ohio Farmers Indemnity Co (1938) 28 Cal.App.2d 14,16). Or, “A common characteristic of a property right, is that it may be disposed of, transferred to another.” (Douglas Aircraft Co. v Byram (1943) 57 Cal.App.2d 311, 317)
Thefore we can see why Peta wanted to take possession/ownership of different animals because after they owned them, they could just dispose of them in the garbage dump (after killing them via lethal injection)—and they suffered no consequences. [Actually it appeared there was fraud in the procurement of the animals but we don't know if they were hit for that.]
And, we can see why HSUS doesn’t want animals TRANSFERRED to others because that’s an element of OWNERSHIP.
The obvious next step for HSUS is to claim if animals can’t be sold or transferred, then that means THEY ARE NOT PROPERTY.
HSUS is currently trying to outlaw the use (import, export, transport, breeding) or movement in interstate commerce of any non native species via HR669 in Congress by using the Lacey Act. See the PIJAC website for details, or see the post on this site with the link to PIJAC.
This would encompass virtually every bird, reptile, amphibian, fish and some mammals kept as pets. In general only a small number of species have caused environmental issues (in FL and HI.)
This nonsense by HSUS subterfuge has not been lost on us.
We are VERY aware of what HSUS and Animal Rights are trying to do. Clearly the agenda is to chip away at the ownership of animals until we miss the fact that the WORDS USED FOR OWNERSHIP have been eliminated, then next thing you know—-HSUS has eliminated the ownership of animals. No transfers, no selling, no bartering, no trading, etc. This has already been attempted in HSUS anti pet laws where a dog with cropped ears couldn’t be transferred/owned by a rescue because the rescue didn’t have the documents proving how the ears were done.
It would be easier to make “owning” something next to impossible, or exorbitantly too expensive or far too much red tape, than to outright say “you can’t own that”–which is Animal Rights done the HSUS way–as can be seen by the multidue of 180 Anti pet laws HSUS is pushing just this year…..
HSUS has a habit of purposely drafting bad laws, then getting them passed, then taking cases, and using the laws that HSUS has HELPED PASS—as proof that such ideas have already been cemented IN THE LAW. In other words, HSUS makes the very laws it fully intends to use as part of a case it has already planned, then if they win that case, it will set some precedent in the law. THIS IS THE NUMBER ONE HSUS GOAL—TO SET ANIMAL RIGHTS LAW PRECEDENT……………………
If you value your ownership over your pets and animals, and the fact that pet-related businesses are allowed to profit over the selling, buying, trading, owning, or otherwise pet-related legal businesse ownership; if you want CHOICE in what dog or cat or bird or fish that you can BUY, own, or trade or sell; if you want the ability to eat the foods you like (milk, eggs, cheese, meat) then you do NOT want to support ANY HSUS LAWS.
As has been stated on this blog ever since it started—you don’t join the KKK if you’re Black, you don’t push Hitler if you’re Jewish, and you don’t help HSUS if you value ownership of animals.
And because the Pet connection blog online, is one that keeps saying (especially author Gina Spadafori) that HSUS can be trusted to do the right thing—where HSUS cannot be trusted at all…………….it is our opinion that Pet connection lacks the ability to discern Animal Rights in disguise—-and we do not recommend anyone following the opinions of much of the blog—mostly because Spadafori only harps on Peta–but not HSUS.
Just because one authors books, doesn’t mean that one knows Animal Rights. Further, Spadifori harped on Petland claiming that they should be OUT of business if they didn’t ADOPT out dogs, rather than SELL them? That is a very very dangerous proposition, and one that we surely don’t want to push as owners. NOT if you understand the HSUS concept of animal rights–which we don’t believe Spadafori understands [unless she is animal rights herself---]
HSUS is the FAR more dangerous group—if you understand Animal Rights. Spadifori also commended HSUS on filing the lawsuit against Hunte and Petland—that is a mistake, because it indicates that one does NOT understand what HSUS is doing strategy wise.
For example, HSUS pushed the Stevens free speech case, so that Stevens would be prosecuted for selling videos which showed dog fighting (he didn’t make the videos)—BUT the Appeals court held that the statute used (which was likely pushed by HSUS)— which was set up for “crush films”, could cause LEGAL acts to become illegal if the law was upheld, and might even cause the Disney film (Bambi) to be illegal. [See the Stevens case on the Front Page on this blogsite]
Another case is Amazon, where after HSUS pushed the Stevens case (Stevens convicted under the statute ) HSUS sued Amazon to stop the sale of chicken videos or dog video sales, claiming they were violating the law. Another case is the PA commercial kennel laws pushed by HSUS and ASPCA, where after the law was passed, HSUS then sued Petland and Hunte, no doubt so they could use their own law that passed (PA) as proof of concern over the commercial kennel issues. All of this is just a part of the pattern and practice of getting incremental steps in place, passing laws, filing lawsuits, and using the laws to set up precedence for HSUS Animal Rights. We don’t doubt for a second that their entire 16 attorney team or 160 member team or whatever, just goes to the conference room and has a session on strategy for the next 5 years.
Don’t think for a second that we haven’t noticed it, because we knew it a long time ago. Another example is the DNA testing and Breed Specific Legislation that HSUS “claims” it doesn’t support?
HSUS filed an amicus animal rights brief in the DENVER 2008 case re BSL, [yes, we did read it]—- claiming that the DNA companies claimed their DNA test “was 99% accurate.” Then on the animal law and historical society page (Michigan School of Law, Animal Rights Section)—the school has pages which show “how DNA proved” that a particular dog WAS NOT a pitbull subject to BSL. But the key really is, if they can prove it ISN’T a pitbull, and it’s actually 99% accurate, can it prove that IT IS A PITBULL?
And that’s why HSUS put that amicus brief in the Federal Court to Denver. So when that issue comes up down the line, HSUS will be the first to claim that DNA testing should be used [to have pitbull dogs killed], because it’s 99% accurate, despite the fact that the AKC and UKC don’t have the exact same breed name/types for American Pitbull Terriers, or American Stafforshire Terriers. AKC doesn’t recognize the APBT. But that won’t stop HSUS—you wait and see. They like to keep people fooled.
Any Animal Rights group like HSUS that has that much time and money into killing pitbull type dogs is definitely going to try and eliminate more of those dogs, use such dogs as a ploy to raise more funding, and then kill more of them. We have long ago figured out HSUS’ pattern and practice, and that’s why we keep telling everyone not to trust HSUS. They are just Animal Rights that think no one can figure out what they are doing.
You don’t have to be an attorney or have a legal education to figure that one out. And you don’t even have to be a pet owner. You just have to have some logic and common sense to see what is going on.
Not in our lifetime, never, never ever. The demise of HSUS will come first. Because too many people will see what they are REALLY doing. Help us spread the word! Tell everyone you know and make it a point to tell at least 10-50 other people. This is the only way that legislators are going to figure it out, and the only way the public will stop donating.
People that donate to HSUS Animal rights might as well donate to PETA. Because they are carrying out the Peta agenda.
There's been some good news but it's still no time to sit back. To see an example of how convoluted and disgusting some of the problems are, see this article on the removal of Ed Boks from L.A. Animal Services. He was major component in pushing some extremist bills in L.A. County and attempted to get all of California to buy the rotten goods.
One of the things that has taken so much time from me over the past weeks has been the effort to keep up with over two dozen animal related bills on the California agenda. The extremist strategy of chopping up the concepts of larger failed bills, into smaller bite sizes, makes it considerably more difficult to get people to realize that all of the bills are part of the greater goals.
Now for some fun. I just have to share this video. No need for captions on this one. :)
And more fun! Free game giveaway of the day is "Around the World in 80 Days", with only eleven hours left for downloads of an unlocked version of the game as I write. This is a beautiful match-3 game and it comes with a screen saver that increases options as you gain levels within the game. Gamezebo reviews this game and gives it a nice write up.
A note used by Vick during his apology is up for auction to benefit HSUS at eBay. 77 bids as of my first hit on the page, current bid is $10,100.00.
According to a NYTimes article which I haven't yet read, it was indicated that the proceeds would be put in a restricted account dedicated to the prevention of dogfighting. Very funny! HSUS has been strongly criticized for taking high profile events and turning them into cash cows and channeling the money wherever they wanted to like eliminating genetic diversity programs, and interfering with local legislation with various types of strongarming, misleading statistics and profiling. Many other animal disasters, such as those involving starving cattle or poisoned camelids get little attention from HSUS because HSUS remains primarily focused on high profile events which can be used to milk funds from the public. Realize that when HSUS does things to "benefit animals", publishing and distributing biased "educational" handouts, holding training seminars for people handling animal concerns and other such matters -- they CHARGE for all of that, and go on bragging about on how much they do to benefit the animal community. It is totally money grab.
In the world of scams, swindling, confidence, con man games - this type of behavior is a crime. HSUS/ Wayne Pacelle shows you an idea and your send money in good faith. In the meantime the confidence man organization has now many officials with six figure incomes and uses your money to seed more income.
Look at how much they have and how much potential cash that they _could_ voluntarily put aside for the animals needing help. Instead, as clearly shown in their financial report, they are using their funds for power, political drives, raising MORE MONEY.
And here we go with a little eBay sale to help the HSUS and supposedly the funds this time... are going to be slotted for one deliberately vague agenda.
How in the world did funds end up going to the various multi-MILLION campaigns/categories listed below.
Did you check some box for those when you sent in a donation?