fearnot claims to know , and to have observed ,Wayne Pacelle? If he does NOT know Wayne Pacelle, how is it that fearnot speculates on Wayne and his pets? What silliness. fearnot is a fantasist. We can speculate anything about anybody. We will speculate that fearnot is a 300 pound friendless preteen wearing a chicken suit.
Of course not! The Supreme Courts decision in the Wal Mart case doesnt change anything. It merely reaffirms existing law.
Rick might toss his granny but Wayne would toss his dog.. if he had one
Jeeze, why is this so difficult? Humanewatch.org is Rick Bermans demon spawn. Who in Gods name get their information from corporate /PR propaganda PooBahs? Rick Berman is the snarkiest slickest slimiest most underhanded lawyer since Idi Amins tax attorney. Richard Berman would throw his granny under a bus to catch a falling nickel. Why these traveling loons spout Bermans anti-humane horse poop defies all reason. Please, use your brain. Ignore them.
ah I see now what Collette really is.. no need to post to her further.
Collette.. it really DOES matter.. if you are lying as HSUS did regarding Vicks dogs.. or Fay (e) the poor dog who had no lower jaw and diedd later due to the tragic circumstances she has to endure they it matters greatly. Fay was a fund raising tool to the HSUS. they paid NOT ONE DIME for her care but had no qualms about posting her story all over their website asking for MONEY to care for her. When the real caregiver outed them she was given $5,000 of hush money to use to pay for surgery that ultimately failed her. Read yes biscuit blog about the Alabama 44. dogs taken by the HSUS and some of them never seen again. When questioned about their whereabouts by the blogger HSUS stalled and danced around the subject. you can read some of it here: http://yesbiscuit.wordpress.com/2011/03/01/the-alabama-44-this-is-not-a-rescue/ You can read about Fay here: http://www.nathanwinograd.com/?p=2318 and here: http://www.petconnection.com/blog/2009/12/04/hsus-fund-raising-pitch-raises-hackles/ and you can read about the Wilkes County dogs here: http://www.nathanwinograd.com/?p=765 if you do the research you will see that the HSUS lies many many times about their missions Vicks dogs is an old story but as most of us know the HSUS claimed to have the dogs when they did not and used that claim to raise millions of dollars That is DECEPTION FOR DOLLARS. something the HSUS is very good at doing and something everyone should be aware of before giving them even one thin dime.
@ Robb Wynne - I dont have time to debate your many points (or, frankly, the inclination. Well just agree to disagree). However, I would like to address the logical fallacy contained in this one: Sadly, HW has offered to bargain and shut down if HSUS would donate 50% to shelters. Thats all they have to do. That or take them to court on slander and defamation of character and they have done neither. You should refresh your understanding of HSUS stated mission. It does not include donating 50% of its fundraising revenue to shelters (or, for that matter, doing any fundraising on behalf of shelters). Nor do they claim to do so in their fundraising appeals or materials. At least, Ive never seen that specific claim. So this argument that HW keeps trying to use to whip people into an outraged frenzy - that HSUS deliberately deceived them into donating - is patently false. Furthermore, if HSUS did donate 50% of their funds directly to shelters, they would be directly affecting their ability to achieve their stated mission goals; in effect, working AGAINST their stated mission goals. Working against your stated mission goals is not good practice for any organization, whether they are profit or nonprofit. HW is asking HSUS to deliberately divert the organizations resources from achieving their mission purpose. HumaneWatch wants HSUS to divert 50% of its funds away from advocacy, because it benefits HumaneWatch, the Center for Consumer Freedom, and the big industry clients that fund them if HSUS has fewer resources to fight them with. In fact, if HumaneWatch is that concerned with shelter animals welfare, their parent company, Center for Consumer Freedom, has a multi-million dollar war chest at their disposal. More than enough to fund every hard-working local shelter and struggling rescue in the country. Why not ask Center for Consumer Freedom to use 50% of ITS money to fund animal rescues and shelters. In fact, why not ask them why they havent already done so? Because HumaneWatchs 50% request has nothing to do with concern for shelter animals, and everything to do with protecting their clients fat profits. If HumaneWatch cares so much about shelter animals, they should focus their attention and energies on helping shelter animals directly (window dressing, in the form of Shelter of the Day does not count). But all HumaneWatch does is attack HSUS, under the warm-and-fuzzy guise of protecting animals and animal lovers. Pure fiction. Its not really a matter of attacking the messenger. The messenger is a mere mouthpiece, with no real credibility.
Prop 13. Gives to the old and steals from the young. Nothing more.
@ Proud Humanewatch Member: We are most definitely not on the same page. I dont support factory farms, canned hunts, or a host of other things that HumaneWatch supports. Organizations, like people, can change their perspectives and positions. I do support what HSUS does today; and I base my support on what they do today - not what they did, or did not do, before. I prefer to make my decisions on present day actions, not old history. Your mileage may vary. Also, if youre upset by HSUS using sad-faced puppy drivel in its fundraising, you should be even more upset by this: HumaneWatch - an organization that does NOTHING tangible whatsoever to benefit animals - uses sad-eyed puppy drivel to fool people into supporting them. HumaneWatch is anti-animal. Anyone who spends a few minutes doing a few minutes of research will discover how anti-animal they, and their most vocal supporters, truly are. And while some supporters of HSUS may feel they were misled, I suspect the majority of HumaneWatchs support would disappear overnight if they revealed that they are not all about the animals (as they take great pains to appear to be). So, sadly, we are not on the same page. It is completely incongruous to simultaneously claim to be a Proud HumaneWatch Member and an animal-lover.
Hawaii is occupied by an indiginous, racist people. Anyone who does not have native blood, is excluded and harrassed.