NAIA

 

From: Wakanska

To: dog_anti-rescue_anti-peta_new@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2008 11:42 PM

Subject: RE: dog_anti-rescue_anti-peta_new NAIA

True.. It is not easy to address problem owners, though. There are indeed quite a few dysfunctional people who drown their neuroses in dogs, cats, etc. They can be chronic offenders, and there simply are not enough people to help them (as if they even would accept help). I have taken a few dogs from a breeder in trouble, only to watch them go and get more dogs! It's a vicious cycle. But these people need psych help or counseling / monitoring, and they are NOT criminals. You would not go out and round up HIV sufferers and force them to accept treatment at their own expense, but somehow, it is considered reasonable to take an elderly woman in failing health and subject her to public humiliation as a "puppymill", then to take her home and life savings to pay for her "crime". It's disgusting, and I rankle when I see a big, multi million dollar "non profit" talk about the "greed" of small breeders, when so many of them are giving everything they can to their dogs and barely scraping by. At the same time, when one of their rescue people crashes and burns, with dead mummified dogs lying around the place or being eaten by other starving dogs, they hush that up, because they know if reflects badly on their community. Why, oh why, then.. Should we attack those who desperately need help and are beyond the point of helping themselves? Why should we cheer when an old woman collapses in court, having learned that her home will be taken from her to pay for the "care" of dogs which were stolen from her? --- On Tue, 10/14/08, Thomas Kirby <slowswimmer1@yahoo.com> wrote: From: Thomas Kirby <slowswimmer1@yahoo.com> Subject: RE: dog_anti-rescue_anti-peta_new NAIA To: dog_anti-rescue_anti-peta_new@yahoogroups.com Date: Tuesday, October 14, 2008, 8:28 PM Taking negative action against anyone is dangerous.  We should have sympathy for people whose neglect, when it actually exists, is because they are in over their heads, they've lost their job, most or all of their income, they're sick or bereaved, and anything like that.  The HSUS and SPCA have been criminalizing normal human failings.  Positive action is to do everything within reason to help people keep their dogs, and if there was such a thing as a humane organization that had that as its goal, it would hire people out to provide help to farmers and breeders who need it, when they need it.  It's ridiculous to say that someone can't handle having a thousand dogs when you look at the dogs and see that they are well fed, clean, and healthy.  An animal culture organization would say "good job!" and tell the owners that they were there if they were needed.  The HSUS helps people fall on their face or trips them. --- On Tue, 10/14/08, Wakanska <wakanska2003@ yahoo.com> wrote: From: Wakanska <wakanska2003@ yahoo.com> Subject: RE: dog_anti-rescue_ anti-peta_ new NAIA To: dog_anti-rescue_ anti-peta_ new@yahoogroups. com Date: Tuesday, October 14, 2008, 12:15 PM Their hearts may be in the right place, but I seriously question that their heads are. Patty has told me that the answer was to "clean up" the commercial dog breeding scene, and there may be some merit to that argument, but I see the dangers, too. --- On Tue, 10/14/08, Letreva Jones <blueribn2@verizon. net> wrote: From: Letreva Jones <blueribn2@verizon. net> Subject: RE: dog_anti-rescue_ anti-peta_ new NAIA To: dog_anti-rescue_ anti-peta_ new@yahoogroups. com Date: Tuesday, October 14, 2008, 9:01 AM The Pres. and her husband are or were breeders of champions and found out about animal rights. It has been their quest ever since to stop AR. They have written books on the subject ( "The Hijacking of the Humane Movement" by Rod & Patti Strand at Amazon.com) and headed up NAIA ever since. I have heard her speak at least twice. The last time was at Hunte Breeders Symposium  recently. I spoke to her about wanting to put some material in my puppy packets about AR and she directed me to some of their brochures on their web site. Letreva Jones From: dog_anti-rescue_ anti-peta_ new@yahoogroups. com [mailto:dog_ anti-rescue_ anti-peta_ new@yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of mark garza Sent: Monday, October 13, 2008 10:50 PM To: dog_anti-rescue_ anti-peta_ new@yahoogroups. com Subject: dog_anti-rescue_ anti-peta_ new NAIA does anyone know anything about NAIA? are they a good group...on their website it says that they fight for the rights to own animals. They fight Peta ect. I thought about joining them...but would like some input. Hope they are for real and not deceptive. They have alot of lawyers and vets on the board of directors... . thanks Mark Garza No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.526 / Virus Database: 270.8.0/1724 - Release Date: 10/14/2008 2:02 AM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.526 / Virus Database: 270.8.0/1724 - Release Date: 10/14/2008 2:02 AM

__._,_.___

Mandatory spay and neuter means pets must grow old and die without replacements. No more babies, no more pets in our homes.  Stop it before it's nationwide. Sterile animals cannot replenish themselves. It's the "facts" of life.

Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___