The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedDirectoriesMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Page 23 of 25 FirstFirst ... 132122232425 LastLast
Results 441 to 460 of 484
  1. #441
    Join Date
    Jan. 29, 2010
    Location
    Satan's Steam Sauna
    Posts
    626

    Default

    And, I would highly encourage anyone who thinks that farmers raising free range birds support HSUS & PETA to actually ask a farmer how they feel about them. I raise free range birds, and the only way I can raise them free range without major predator losses is with the help of my livestock guardian dogs. My girls LOVE to work and choose to work; but these HSUS & PETA fools insist that these dogs can only be happy as house pets. My girls have house privileges; but they would be perfectly happy just staying out guarding the sheep and birds.

    Exactly what MistyBlue said - LEARN about the reality of what these people are up to.
    Disclaimer: Just a beginner who knows nothing about nothing



  2. #442
    Join Date
    Dec. 19, 2005
    Location
    Some where in the middle of nowhere.
    Posts
    3,617

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ldaziens View Post
    And, I would highly encourage anyone who thinks that farmers raising free range birds support HSUS & PETA to actually ask a farmer how they feel about them. I raise free range birds, and the only way I can raise them free range without major predator losses is with the help of my livestock guardian dogs. My girls LOVE to work and choose to work; but these HSUS & PETA fools insist that these dogs can only be happy as house pets. My girls have house privileges; but they would be perfectly happy just staying out guarding the sheep and birds.

    Exactly what MistyBlue said - LEARN about the reality of what these people are up to.

    They don't even want that. I saw a recent posting on W.A.R I believe but don't quote might have been one of the others . Where one person spouted off about how cruel it was to keep a dog as a domestic companion. That we make them sit in the house all day while we go off to work etc forcing them to hold their bladders and be un natural. Then again they try to force their Carnivore only cats to eat a "healty" Vegan diet.

    About 15 years ago there was a study done on the diets of house cats and the diseases most linked to their foods. Diabetes , Renal Failure etc. In the end the study proved out of all the types tested the healthiest cats were being fed "ground mouse". Literally lab raised mice tossed whole into a meat grinder and then fed fresh. So talk about cruel taking an animal that is designed to eat meat and forcing it to eat a plant based diet because of your opinion.

    They don't want house pets they don't want PETS PERIOD.
    "I would not beleive her if her tongue came notorized"



  3. #443
    Join Date
    Jan. 29, 2010
    Location
    Satan's Steam Sauna
    Posts
    626

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lynnwood View Post
    They don't want house pets they don't want PETS PERIOD.
    The ultimate goal is no pets; but between now and then it's just about relentlessly harassing people on multiple fronts.

    Vegan dog and cat food -- seriously HOW does this nonsense get any traction.
    Disclaimer: Just a beginner who knows nothing about nothing



  4. #444
    Join Date
    Dec. 31, 2000
    Location
    El Paso, TX
    Posts
    12,640

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MistyBlue View Post

    The point with those who disagree with some of you is that welfare is fantastic. Rights are not.

    Agreeing and supporting welfare does *not* mean the person is close minded, enjoys seeing animals fighting and most certainly does not mean they only want their personal views of humane only.

    As a matter of fact it means the direct opposite of that. That they agree with welfare laws and want them upheld...they do NOT want a few inexperienced people forcing their opinions into laws. Which is what animals rights are.

    Jetsmom...do you really honestly think that the folks you dislike on here would seriously be for dog and cock fighting for any reason? Honestly?

    The point many have been attempting to make on these ridiculous threads is:

    LEARN exactly what is going on...LEARN it. Do not parrot what the internet says. Get off your duffs, get out there and use reason without bias. The internet...she lies. A lot. Kinda like the silliness of folks posting "HSUS is not animal rights! They don't have that on their website!"

    Because the rhetoric being posted here about fox hunting couldn't be more dramatic & ridiculous if it was a soap opera script.
    Sorry, but I see no difference between a foxhunt where you let the hounds kill the fox for the rider's amusement, or where people engage in dogfighting or cockfighting for their amusement. Except the social status of those involved. So if you support one, there is no reason they wouldn't support the other. Both end up with dead animals for the people's entertainment. Same thing with trophy hunting when they are doing it just to mount the head.

    And not everyone thinks that the HSUS is an AR organization. Taking some old quotes, often out of context, doesn't make it one. And not donating to shelters doesn't make it one, when their mission statement isn't one of being a shelter. They lobby/fight for bills designed to prevent abuse/make animal use more humane. But you disagree with me on that...so be it. You're entitled to your opinion. But it works both ways. You want to say, "Don't believe the internet/biased sites, but your buddy Bluey trots out the numerous Richard Berman sites all of the time. A paid lobbysist who keeps 92 cents of every dollar donated to one of his faux charities. And yet you and others will never tell her that the site is biased. So you all, have a biased agenda, yet won't admit it. Did you even look at the link allintexas linked on the other thread?.



  5. #445
    Join Date
    Jun. 19, 2011
    Posts
    2,989

    Default

    The comments were delivered exactly as stated. Pacelle discovered that Joe and Martha thought they were too radical so he toned his comments down to make them "easier to swallow".

    Nice guy...kinda like Bill Clinton...a great conversationalist...

    but...would you trust him with your daughter...alone?

    Then why trust him with your pets or livestock.

    It is all about the M O N E Y

    Having worked from the inside out..what we read and see is hardly what is spoken about behind closed doors.

    There IS a Vegan agenda.
    There is a ban on livestock agenda

    He won't tackle the pet issue as he would like to as most people have a grand mother/father who owns a pet...he wants THEIR money


    a quote from a Nibbler

    "Sorry, but I see no difference between a foxhunt where you let the hounds kill the fox for the rider's amusement, or where people engage in dogfighting or cockfighting for their amusement. Except the social status of those involved. So if you support one, there is no reason they wouldn't support the other. Both end up with dead animals for the people's entertainment. Same thing with trophy hunting when they are doing it just to mount the head"


    But...but....but....darn it...didn't WAYNE PACELLE HSUS CEO PROCLAIM that Michael Vicks would make a GREAT PET OWNER?

    Vicks has NEVER been remorseful for all of the deaths which were staggering according to the ASPCA...the number of animals...puppies...kittens...cats...wild animals tossed into the pen so a good and violent KILL could be made. Therefore they would LEARN how to kill and if they didn't...he broke their front legs and tossed them back in to be killed.

    and yet....Wayne PROCLAIMS that Vicks is ONE OF THEM...

    Vicks just blames his culture and his mistreatment as a youth...

    Hate to let reality destroy your premise



  6. #446
    Join Date
    Mar. 18, 2005
    Posts
    205

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jetsmom View Post
    Sorry, but I see no difference between a foxhunt where you let the hounds kill the fox for the rider's amusement, or where people engage in dogfighting or cockfighting for their amusement. Except the social status of those involved. So if you support one, there is no reason they wouldn't support the other. Both end up with dead animals for the people's entertainment. Same thing with trophy hunting when they are doing it just to mount the head.

    And not everyone thinks that the HSUS is an AR organization. Taking some old quotes, often out of context, doesn't make it one. And not donating to shelters doesn't make it one, when their mission statement isn't one of being a shelter. They lobby/fight for bills designed to prevent abuse/make animal use more humane. But you disagree with me on that...so be it. You're entitled to your opinion. But it works both ways. You want to say, "Don't believe the internet/biased sites, but your buddy Bluey trots out the numerous Richard Berman sites all of the time. A paid lobbysist who keeps 92 cents of every dollar donated to one of his faux charities. And yet you and others will never tell her that the site is biased. So you all, have a biased agenda, yet won't admit it. Did you even look at the link allintexas linked on the other thread?.
    Bluey the site is biased.

    Of course it is biased. Every site, every statement, every post, every donation is biased. Seeing past the bias to the facts is what is important and what makes us informed. The facts are still true.

    HSUS presents very few facts. They prey on emotion as they do not have to prove anything that way. HSUS and PETA nibble away at the edges of our rights. Enough little nibbles equal a large bite. RARAs believe and spout the statements they make without verifying the facts. Can you show me a statement made py Mr. Purcell supporting domestic animal ownership? Not the mission statement but a statement he has made to refute the earlier statements.
    I support equine meat processing as an option for those who choose to use it.



  7. #447
    Join Date
    Mar. 19, 2010
    Posts
    416

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jetsmom View Post
    Sorry, but I see no difference between a foxhunt where you let the hounds kill the fox for the rider's amusement... .
    Wow. You really know nothing about foxhunting, do you? Oh, I'm sure you think you do, but
    Most people don't need a $35,000 horse. They need a $1,000 horse and $34,000 in lessons.

    "I don't have to be fair… . I'm an American With a Strong, Fact-Free Opinion." (stolen off Facebook)



  8. #448
    Join Date
    Apr. 3, 2006
    Location
    Spooner, WI
    Posts
    2,260

    Default

    Could you please explain how foxhunting works? Don't the hounds eventually kill the fox? I thought that is why it was banned. A form of dog(canine) fighting.



  9. #449
    Join Date
    Feb. 6, 2003
    Location
    NorthEast
    Posts
    24,515

    Default

    And not everyone thinks that the HSUS is an AR organization.
    The US government does.

    And HSUS does not hide it. They just don't use the actual word "rights" after learning that the general public views animal rights proponents as mentally unstable, fanatic and in some cases domesticen terrorists.

    HSUS used to term themselves as Animal Welfare advocates.

    As soon as Wayne went to work there...he dropped the "welfare" and, on the advice of his legal team, changed it to Animal Protection instead of Animal Rights.

    Wayne doesn't really hide it. Let's look at his bio he wrote on his own blog:

    The organization is the 155th largest charity in the United States. The growth has partly been achieved through successful mergers with other animal protection organizations. In 2004, Wayne Pacelle and Michael Markarian (president of The Fund for Animals and now chief program and policy officer of The HSUS) helped engineer the corporate combination of The HSUS and The Fund for Animals, the national organization founded by Cleveland Amory. In 2006, Pacelle was the architect of a combination with the Doris Day Animal League, which was founded nearly 20 years ago by iconic actress Doris Day, and is one of the major American animal protection organizations. He created the Humane Society Veterinary Medical Association, after the formerly named Association of Veterinarians for Animal Rights was brought into the HSUS family.
    Fund for animals is an Animal RIGHTS org. Started by bigtime Animal Rights activist Cleveland Amory. Taken over after Amory's death by Markarian...also a self avowed animal rights activist.
    Wayne was pres of peta, animal rights.
    Wayne also absorbed Doris Day's org...Doris day was a self avowed animal rights activist.
    Wayne absorbed in the Vets for ANIMAL RIGHTS group and renamed it to remove the rights.

    To think that HSUS, all top officers replaced by Wayne all from animal rights and wayne himself from Peta, is NOT animal rights is either naive or purposely obtuse.
    You jump in the saddle,
    Hold onto the bridle!
    Jump in the line!
    ...Belefonte



  10. #450
    Bluey is offline Schoolmaster Premium Member
    Original Poster
    Join Date
    Jan. 4, 2007
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    41,101

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MistyBlue View Post
    The US government does.

    And HSUS does not hide it. They just don't use the actual word "rights" after learning that the general public views animal rights proponents as mentally unstable, fanatic and in some cases domesticen terrorists.

    HSUS used to term themselves as Animal Welfare advocates.

    As soon as Wayne went to work there...he dropped the "welfare" and, on the advice of his legal team, changed it to Animal Protection instead of Animal Rights.

    Wayne doesn't really hide it. Let's look at his bio he wrote on his own blog:



    Fund for animals is an Animal RIGHTS org. Started by bigtime Animal Rights activist Cleveland Amory. Taken over after Amory's death by Markarian...also a self avowed animal rights activist.
    Wayne was pres of peta, animal rights.
    Wayne also absorbed Doris Day's org...Doris day was a self avowed animal rights activist.
    Wayne absorbed in the Vets for ANIMAL RIGHTS group and renamed it to remove the rights.

    To think that HSUS, all top officers replaced by Wayne all from animal rights and wayne himself from Peta, is NOT animal rights is either naive or purposely obtuse.
    If it walks like a duck, if it quacks like a duck, no matter what it wants to call itself, no matter where it comes from, it is indisputably a duck.

    I think that is some of what the article that started this thread was saying.
    Finally even the main media is catching on.
    Sorry, they can't hide their duckiness any more, no matter how they try to spin it.



  11. #451
    Join Date
    Jun. 19, 2011
    Posts
    2,989

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MistyBlue View Post
    The US government does.

    And HSUS does not hide it. They just don't use the actual word "rights" after learning that the general public views animal rights proponents as mentally unstable, fanatic and in some cases domesticen terrorists.

    HSUS used to term themselves as Animal Welfare advocates.

    As soon as Wayne went to work there...he dropped the "welfare" and, on the advice of his legal team, changed it to Animal Protection instead of Animal Rights.

    Wayne doesn't really hide it. Let's look at his bio he wrote on his own blog:



    Fund for animals is an Animal RIGHTS org. Started by bigtime Animal Rights activist Cleveland Amory. Taken over after Amory's death by Markarian...also a self avowed animal rights activist.
    Wayne was pres of peta, animal rights.
    Wayne also absorbed Doris Day's org...Doris day was a self avowed animal rights activist.
    Wayne absorbed in the Vets for ANIMAL RIGHTS group and renamed it to remove the rights.

    To think that HSUS, all top officers replaced by Wayne all from animal rights and wayne himself from Peta, is NOT animal rights is either naive or purposely obtuse.
    This is a very important post because when I posted my concerns regarding Vets having their education paid for by HSUS the standard thought was...who cares!!

    We are now finding out how insidious this program is.

    These are vets who REFUSE to euthanize any healthy animal for any reason. We have a pending suit where a vet told a lady he would put down the family dog (both parents laid off work) when they put down one of their children.

    Another vet arrived at a farm where the owner of an elderly horse stated old "dobbin" could not make it through another winter so he wanted him put down while the temperatures were warm. Dobbin was 32 years old..and was thin as most horses that age become. The vet reported him to authorities and he was charged with ABUSE AND NEGLECT. It was eventaully tossed out because ANOTHER vet had viewed the horse over the years...and had helped develope a special diet.

    HSUS vets regularly attend auctions looking for old or thin horses that owners have put into the sale KNOWING they will go for slaughter. They contact local authorities and have them charged (we have over 40 cases on this premise alone)

    HSUS regularly approaches the courts with an explaination as to why THEIR vets should be considered to be the final word during a trial. And, as we found out during the Vess case, the courts can be swayed and the testimony of an equine vet with over 25 years experience was over turned by the testimony of a vet (general practice with only 40 hours of equine study) who was in her SECOND year of practice.



  12. #452
    Join Date
    Jun. 27, 2005
    Location
    KY
    Posts
    4,662

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fairfax View Post
    HSUS vets regularly attend auctions looking for old or thin horses that owners have put into the sale KNOWING they will go for slaughter. They contact local authorities and have them charged (we have over 40 cases on this premise alone)
    Charged with what ??????????????

    Owning old horses is not against the law.

    Selling horses is not against the law.

    Selling for slaughter is not against the law.

    I NEVER saw anyone from HSUS at the auctions I frequented. As a matter of fact, NOBODY of any authority (AG Dept., Auction vet) ever gave a rat's behind what shape the horses were in that came into the sale.

    So facts please FF.

    ************************
    \"Horses lend us the wings we lack\"



  13. #453
    Bluey is offline Schoolmaster Premium Member
    Original Poster
    Join Date
    Jan. 4, 2007
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    41,101

    Default

    The facts here is that, long before the HSUS was active with the abuse card and videos from sale barns and farms and all that for their cause of the moment donation drives, sale barns already had protocols for what animals they accepted or not for their sales.

    That doesn't mean some animal may not have been kept there from individuals that was not up to those standards, but it was not part of the sale.

    For a good 30+ years, our sale barn had a sign with that, for the increasingly clueless new animal owners that didn't know what good animal husbandry is.
    In that sign it was clearly stated any animal having ambulatory problems or open wounds would be rejected.
    If it was bad, the owner was reported to the sheriff, if the situation was decided to be extreme by the sale vet.

    Yes, good animal husbandry is what those that care for animals have always done, well before any animal rights extremists groups decided that using abuses was a great way to condemn all animal users, as they have done more and more, even making up some of the abuse, as those stories finally coming to light show, as in the circus lawsuit they lost.

    Remember, if you see abuse anywhere, including sale barns, speak up and help remedy that.
    Don't go believing aligning yourself with some animal rights extremist group is going to help the animals, because their intent is not that, but to eliminate all uses, eventually.

    I think it is idiocy to align yourself with animal rights extremist groups, if you want to keep YOUR rights to have and care for any animals.
    Hard to understand why anyone would think that makes any kind of sense.

    Now, if you really think that we need a new world order, where humans don't get to have any animals in their care at all, hands off them totally, then yes, animal rights extremists groups are for you.

    Then all I will say is that we have to agree to disagree.

    Each one of us is free to have our own opinions, including the opinion that humans should now quit using animals, as we have evolved doing in this world, as the natural, renewable resource they are.

    That is what freedom is, each one can have their own opinion.
    With freedoms come responsibilities, including to respect other's freedoms.

    That is where I won't agree that animal rights extremists have the right to determine if the rest of us get to have and use animals.
    I would not demand they have to use animals or else, which would be the other coin of being intransigent and wanting to impose our opinions on others, just as they are trying to do.



  14. #454
    Join Date
    Apr. 3, 2006
    Location
    Spooner, WI
    Posts
    2,260

    Default

    Posting again since I'm all about facts. Where, anywhere, please, does/has one of these organizations ever stated they want to end all animal use, pets or otherwise.

    I need facts to make a decision about anything. It has kept me out of a lot trouble in my life to seek out the real truth.

    Like MistyBlue stated in an earlier post, don't believe the internet. I believe nothing in general, most people are just plain wrong, they don't look beyond what is in front of them. Even experts in their field.



  15. #455
    Join Date
    Jun. 19, 2011
    Posts
    2,989

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by luvmytbs View Post
    Charged with what ??????????????

    Owning old horses is not against the law.

    Selling horses is not against the law.

    Selling for slaughter is not against the law.

    I NEVER saw anyone from HSUS at the auctions I frequented. As a matter of fact, NOBODY of any authority (AG Dept., Auction vet) ever gave a rat's behind what shape the horses were in that came into the sale.

    So facts please FF.
    It IS against the law to have a horse considered to be under weight. When a person sends the horse to the auction, the local authorities DO have the right to charge the seller with neglect and abuse.

    Most famous case was Axel and Dale Huber. They were charged when they took their old non producing mares to the auction (4 of them) and yes...they were under weight. They were charged with Abuse, Christine Matthews took two thin TB's to a sale in Florida and was charged.

    This is done to stop individuals from using auctions especially if kill buyers are present. It is all done to intimidate and create and aura of fear



  16. #456
    Join Date
    Dec. 29, 1999
    Location
    Harrisburg, PA USA
    Posts
    6,137

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jetsmom View Post
    Sorry, but I see no difference between a foxhunt where you let the hounds kill the fox for the rider's amusement, or where people engage in dogfighting or cockfighting for their amusement. Except the social status of those involved.
    You see no difference between a wild animal that can run away, knows the territory, can go to ground, etc. and animals put in a very small confined space with no way to leave that tiny box? Truly? You don't see the difference? Wow.

    And "social status"? You're one of those ARs who think that everybody who hunts has is a toff?



  17. #457
    Join Date
    Jun. 27, 2005
    Location
    KY
    Posts
    4,662

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bluey View Post
    sale barns already had protocols for what animals they accepted or not for their sales.


    For a good 30+ years, our sale barn had a sign with that, for the increasingly clueless new animal owners that didn't know what good animal husbandry is.
    In that sign it was clearly stated any animal having ambulatory problems or open wounds would be rejected.
    Signs (rules) are everywhere we go in life.
    They mean nothing if they are not enforced.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bluey View Post
    If it was bad, the owner was reported to the sheriff, if the situation was decided to be extreme by the sale vet.
    And you have seen that happen with your own eyes? Anyone ever been charged?
    Don't think so. Not in my corner of the world.


    Quote Originally Posted by Bluey View Post
    Remember, if you see abuse anywhere, including sale barns, speak up and help remedy that.
    Been there, done that.
    Best I ever got: "Let's hope someone will buy the horse and feed it."
    .

    ************************
    \"Horses lend us the wings we lack\"



  18. #458
    Join Date
    Dec. 29, 1999
    Location
    Harrisburg, PA USA
    Posts
    6,137

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sunridge1 View Post
    Posting again since I'm all about facts. Where, anywhere, please, does/has one of these organizations ever stated they want to end all animal use, pets or otherwise.
    “We have no ethical obligation to preserve the different breeds of livestock produced through selective breeding. One generation and out. We have no problem with the extinction of domestic animals. They are creations of human selective breeding.” Wayne Pacelle, Humane Society of the United States, Animal People, May, 1993.

    "It is time we demand an end to the misguided and abusive concept of animal ownership. The first step on this long, but just, road would be ending the concept of pet ownership.” Elliot Katz, President “In Defense of Animals,” Spring 1997.

    “In the end, I think it would be lovely if we stopped this whole notion of pets altogether.” Ingrid Newkirk, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PeTA), Newsday, 2/21/88.

    "But as the surplus of cats and dogs (artificially engineered by centuries of forced breeding) declined, eventually companion animals would be phased out, and we would return to a more symbiotic relationship – enjoyment at a distance.” Ingrid Newkirk, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PeTA), The Harper’s Forum Book, Jack Hitt, ed., 1989, p.223.

    “Let us allow the dog to disappear from our brick and concrete jungles–from our firesides, from the leather nooses and chains by which we enslave it.” John Bryant, Fettered Kingdoms: An Examination of A Changing Ethic Washington People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, (PeTA), 1982, p. 15.

    “We are not terrorists, but we are a threat. We are a threat both economically and philosophically. Our power is not in the right to vote but the power to stop production. We will break the law and destroy property until we win.” Dr. Steven Best, speaking at International Animal Rights Gathering 2005. The Telegram (UK) July 17, 2005.



  19. #459
    Join Date
    Dec. 29, 1999
    Location
    Harrisburg, PA USA
    Posts
    6,137

    Default

    Here's another: “The cat, like the dog, must disappear….. We should cut the domestic cat free from our dominance by neutering, neutering, and more neutering, until our pathetic version of the cat ceases to exist.”
    -John Bryant, Fettered Kingdoms: An Examination of a Changing Ethic, PETA 1982, p.15.

    Now, how can it be clearer than that? It is crystal clear and animal rights advocates are entirely about eliminating domestic animals.



  20. #460
    Join Date
    Jun. 27, 2005
    Location
    KY
    Posts
    4,662

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fairfax View Post
    It IS against the law to have a horse considered to be under weight. When a person sends the horse to the auction, the local authorities DO have the right to charge the seller with neglect and abuse.
    But they don't.

    You and bluey are dilusional.

    ************************
    \"Horses lend us the wings we lack\"



Similar Threads

  1. Rights of a half-leaser
    By Aria in forum Off Course
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: Aug. 10, 2012, 11:54 AM
  2. HELP! What are my legal rights?
    By JumpEmHigh in forum Around The Farm
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: Dec. 30, 2011, 09:08 PM
  3. Water rights for wild horses questioned
    By poltroon in forum Off Course
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: Jan. 16, 2011, 04:22 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
randomness