Fw: dog_anti-rescue_anti-peta_new article (long reply)
----- Original Message -----
From: Thomas Kirby
Sent: Sunday, November 09, 2008 2:35 PM
Subject: Re: dog_anti-rescue_anti-peta_new article (long reply)
The first time I wrote "long reply" I actually trimmed the reply to something reasonable and then forgot to change the subject line back. It looks like this will be the long reply. Animal welfare people want their royal asses kissed and they will thoroughly destroy whoever refuses to pucker up if they can. This is the absolute worse way to take care of animal welfare or human problems. The poisonings, the deliberate release of animals, and sometimes even shootings help this program along. It always grinds on my nerves to know that I am dealing with people who are in a position where I look bad if I criticize them openly because people are so used to this garbage. What you said about sucking the joy out of things, Indy. I have a free episode of "Life is Wild" on my hard drive, the pilot episode. The previews show a girl stroking a purring cheetah. If I actually watch that episode I might throw the monitor across the room before I finish watching it because of what "they" have done to me. I can't even watch enough of it to get their propaganda for sure, except that the previews also showed them forcing their pet to live in the wild, which they would call "abandonment" if an ordinary human did the same thing. They think of their sociopathy as a virtue. In some way or another I realized this about the church I used to attend. There is always too much about crushing someone out of existence, removing things that God doesn't like to look at, and dealing harshly with those who display human sympathy towards those were destroyed in God's name. That is a manifestation of the negative morality that I talk about. It's a contagious illness. Recently I've heard too much about how tigers will bond with some humans and will simply kill strangers, a dire warning that is maybe meant for the safety of anyone who would approach but has only a grain of truth. Tigers might be taught, by absorbing the attitudes of their owners, to kill strange humans or act threatening, but I don't think that's what they mean either. They want to be able to sell hands-off association, giving the minimum amount of "goods" for the money that they hope that they can guilt out of people. I don't think that anyone in the business is immune to that. They also want to receive the minimum amount of hassle from the authorities, and some have given up their USDA licenses on that and other principles that involve common decency. Right now on another group I think some of the people want to push me out because I don't believe in the latest bad attitude. So and so is right because he's an expert and he's been in the biz for 25 years and he's for ownership rights, ad hurleum, so I should sit down and drink a can of STFU and never think that I can trust or pet animals which I really have never met although I have spent a little time with them through the cage actually touching and getting to know them. I'm bemused at this because the same self-styled experts are being displaced by college boys and girls who have an animal rights agenda and book learning that says "keep your mitts off." The biz largely consists of people who either don't have the strength to hold their ground or if they have the strength they don't understand the idea of holding their ground. Then the ones who I consider "good" and "bad" bicker with each other and if one faction isn't baiting the other faction, they're taking the bait. We don't know how to stop when we don't know when we're doing it. Deception comes in from all angles and confuses issues, which is why I wrote up a set of principles that I thought applied to the situation, because deception works because people don't have principles written down to cover animal ownership. A charismatic sociopath can have people killing off their own pets, cutting off their own gonads let along the gonads on their animals, reducing and spending themselves down to nothing to gain a small amount of enlightenment that wouldn't do them nearly as much good as doing their own research and thinking for themselves. The person who holds a tiger cub in her arms learns more than everything that a Carol Baskin has to teach. --- On Sun, 11/9/08, Indy <sarah3@gamebox. You are both absolutely right, Thomas and Wakanska. It's frightening, really, that people everywhere are getting so manipulated and controlled, by others who do not have their interests or even the interests of the animals for that matter, at heart. The people being manipulated by these agendas don't even realize it for the most part. The media is a big help with the wrong agendas, they never report about a private citizen and a pet tiger or other exotic animal, or even their certain large dog breed getting along, with the animal never attacking anyone. But as soon as they can latch onto a one in a thousand sad tale about some large animal in the private sector mauling someone or their pets, it gets splashed all over every front page and TV screen. And the message they try to present is "Don't get a tiger! Don't get a pitbull! They are dangerous, they are wild, and they WILL attack you!" The animal welfare operations, the "sanctuaries" get to keep all sorts of animals, and get on TV, ranting about how every animal in their care was neglected or abused before arriving there, and how each animal is so much better off in the sanctuary, and what a terrible shame it couldn't have been born in the wild, blah, blah, blah. Making the ownership of any animal, criminalizes people simply for owning something, and that is wrong on so many levels. If people are found keeping an animal illegally, even if they and that animal have a wonderful bond, and the animal is thriving, that doesn't matter to the animal welfare people or those who inforce the corrupt law that makes you a criminal for owning an animal on the banned list. Animals have been taken from loving homes where there was no abuse or neglect, and no instances of animal attacks, and placed into sanctuaries where they do anything but thrive, spending the rest of their lives away from their owners, around strange people and animals, getting minimal contact and love. I have a big problem with celebrities who own or get to be around some exotic animals just because they are famous. Especially if they tell everybody else not to own whatever animal they like. This has pretty much sucked any joy out of family movies that use exotic animals as a main part of some character's life on any movie or show. Animal welfare people who sell animals will only sell to certain people, screen the heck out of them, and sell only if every condition is promised to be met by the new owner. They are also more than likely to call it "adoption" and talk about their "rescueing" as well as be breeders of whatever animals. And this even makes it very hard to find someone to buy from these days. |
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.
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
.
__,_._,___
posted by Capri at
Monday, November 10, 2008
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home