Guest guest Posted June 9, 2000 Report Share Posted June 9, 2000 I thought I would post some excerpts from some dialog I had with some anti animal people on the Anti-PETA mailing list. I noticed several had previously posted erroneous, distorted information and in some cases- complete fabrication of information about MO. HB 1658 which the Myers and I got started. I d to the list to post some facts, at least 2 or 3 of the rs were openly hostile, antagonistic and sarcastic from the very start despite my calm, business-like, polite and respectful posting. Here are some excerpts, and I think we can blame PeTA for creating this kind of an attitude against *ALL* animal welfare advocates. We are now all " officially " lumped in with the radicals at ALF too. The list even has the infamous Berosini the animal " trainer " on it as a r:   <Berosini Thu Jun 8, 2000 5:19am Re: A message for the ARA on this list In a message dated 6/6/00 10:20:09 PM Pacific Daylight Time, krohndog writes: << I am well aware of the issues regarding mandatory spay/neuter ordinances. HSUS, the fine organization that is the beneficiary of your life insurance policy is a huge supporter of such ordinances. >> To AnimalSav .... I am afraid I have to agree with Kim .. I find the HSUS not much better than PETA .. besides that I have seen you post on Pro PETA lists and you talk out of both sides of your mouth ... me thinks you are a trouble maker. I also find your posts on the 'bestiality' subject unsavoury .. it has long been known that Animal Rights is a proponent of sex with animals .. one very good example is Church of Euthanasia .. which is an AR organization was was always featured on envirolink and used to carry graphic depictions of dog/human sex ========= >capri >Mailing-List: list Anti-PETA >Anti-PETA >In a message dated 6/8/00 12:31:10 AM, capri writes: >>Animalsav writes: >> You have been hostile, antagonistic and sarcastic from the very start, >You get what you ask for. you support HSUS, they treat people like crap >and would rather save a cat in a storm than a child. They'd rather kill >exotic animals than let loving people care for them. you support them so >that makes you an Ar idiot and you deserve whatever sarcasm and hostility >you get. This is the anti-peta list. If you don't like it, leave >it. Besides, your mindless blabber about dog owners being selfish and >breeders needing to be saved from themselves just proves what an arrogant >!$$h0|3 you really are. you make stupid statements like that, you generate >unfriendly responses. Get it? >> starting with your post about " the nut case " , [ me ] >you are a nutcase if you think an organization that would kill exotic >animals instead of letting them live in private homes, and shows no >concern for people in natural disasters and only throws fits over some >cats that have a much better chance of living through it than a lot of >people especially children. You support that organization that makes you >a nutcase AR. >>everything, and when I do, you still refer to me as an " A/R " >Because you are, HSUS supporter = Ar lunatic. and if you believe in people >having sex with animals is so rampant then you are really out of touch, >lost in your Ar perv-addicted world. >> You sure have been 100%, including spreading erroneous information, >> misinformation, conjecture and rumor which is why I posted the facts. [ About Missouri HB1658 to make sex with animals a crime as it was before it was made LEGAL by removal of an old sodomy law ] >Geez, you Ar stupes either haven't looked at yourselves in the mirror for >a very long time or else mmistake your own reflections for us. >> >> You seem " concerned " to the point of paranoia, are dog shows really worth >>all >> *that* effort you seem to expend? >You seem " concerned " to the point of paranoia, is your fantasy world of >beastiality really worth all that effort you seem to expend? >> >> I eventualy figured there were better things I could spend $100 a weekend >>on >Like supporting the HSUS and other nonsense no doubt... >Capri ============= > >krohndog > > We have a good group of > >people monitoring animal legislation in Missouri and can take care of > >ourselves. > animalsave wrote: > And are against a bill that will make forced sexual intercourse with animals > a crime as it was, that will go over real well if people realise > who is behind trying to defeat it! > > Now you are seriously tap-dancing on the legal minefield. That is > >absolutely FALSE! The Federation was NOT against the bill nor were they > >trying to defeat the bill, and you would be wise not to spread false > >information. The bill was merely being monitored AS IS ANY ANIMAL > >RELATED LEGISLATION since wording can be changed at the drop of a hat > >and amendments can be attached to bills from the same chapter. SNIP > >Hello! I told him he didn't belong on this list. Maybe you'll have > >better luck than I did. I guess this is my fault for responding to > >his post in an effort to run him off. You have my permission to be > >angry with me. > >The only reason it involves groups like PETA is because they will > >exploit this information (and probably manufacture stuff that is worse > >than reality) in order to raise money. The ARAs have always used lies > >and propaganda to raise money. You hit it right on the head when you > >said there are things you just don't want to know. Unsuspecting people > >will send the ARAs money to " make it go away " . ================= >In a message dated 6/7/00 2:30:37 PM, krohndog writes: Animalsav wrote: Let me ask you a question, are you always this antagonistic and sarcastic towards people and ignore what they say? Or are you just having a bad week? >I don't consider myself to be antagonistic and sarcastic. You have been hostile, antagonistic and sarcastic from the very start, starting with your post about " the nut case " >I'm not >ignoring what you say It sure seems like you do, because I have to repeat, describe and explain everything, and when I do, you still refer to me as an " A/R " >I'm forcing myself to read every word. I just >call it as I see it. And I see an AR on this list who doesn't even live >in Missouri and is meddling in our business. I have an assistant who DOES live in your state and this is his personal issue too. He and his wife feel *very* strongly about this issue and they did all of the legwork there. I educated them as to the issues, provided additional facts, comments and suggestions. > We have a good group of >people monitoring animal legislation in Missouri and can take care of >ourselves. And are against a bill that will make forced sexual intercourse with animals a crime as it was, that will go over real well if people realise who is behind trying to defeat it! You wouldn't be one of the zoophiles by any chance would you ? and that's why you are so opposed to this bill to make sex with animals a crime? It has been my experiance the past 2-1/2 years on this issue that the onl people who are against making forced intercourse with dogs a crime are those who engage in sex with animals, or their friends who blindly support them. >Sorry, I'm not a zoophile. Hate to disappoint you. Didn't even know >that this type of activity existed until I was in my 20's and married >and the subject turned up on an episode of " Hill Street Blues " . I guess >this indicates that I had a normal, although sheltered, childhood. >I'm not necessarily against the bill. You sure have been 100%, including spreading erroneous information, misinformation, conjecture and rumor which is why I posted the facts. If you or anyone else has a problem with legislation making sex with animals a crime *I* am the one to talk to, or ask questions of, not the HSUS, not the MAAL, not Peta, not other people on a list like this who also don't know the background or facts. >I'm concerned about any law that >gives the ARAs another vehicle to interfere with the sport of pure bred >dogs. You seem " concerned " to the point of paranoia, are dog shows really worth all *that* effort you seem to expend? I did the shows for five years, you mail in your $18-$22 (then) entry fee, wait for the paperwork to come, go to all the trouble of grooming, training, travel etc etc to spend 10 minutes in a ring and getting dumped in favor of " Joe Blow " , P.H.A. member. They were fun to a point, and I obtained points and majors but after a while it becomes more work and effort than it was worth for some nylon ribbons and trinkets. I eventualy figured there were better things I could spend $100 a weekend on than lining AKC's pockets or providing an easy point for a PHA member with my puppy in bred-by class who would never have a prayer of a chance against that kind of thing. All the A/R's need to thwart shows is simply lobbying and getting a law banning live exhibitions of animals, especially during hot weather. They can cite the heat stress, heat related deaths that happen now and then etc. Then they not only kill off dog shows, in one fell sweep they nail circus' rodeos, horse shows, cat shows, pet shows, 4-H shows. They can use that also to nail training classes, socialization classes, obedience classes, show handling classes etc which are held in parks or public places. There are far easier less complicated less gross, more " Joe Public supporting " ways for them to stop breeding, shows etc. I seriously doubt ANY a/R groups are going to use a SEX law most don't even want to hear about, which so far few if any have even had the guts to publish in their newsletters or magazines and which specifically EXCLUDES in writing, all normal customary animal husbandry practices etc. If that's what has you and others so concerned, I will make *sure* Hanaway adds that in writing to the bill, even though she has already assured me she will when she replied to my mail earlier in the year about that. She plans/planned to add it after it made it's way through the committee. I had also explained WHY she needs to add this and I believe she does understand the reasoning. Any bill proposed is always going to have changes made to it as it progresses, and while I originally wanted to see it added to existing animal abuse laws, she put it out in the form she did. you don't see it as such, but I do. I would rather see the >current laws strengthened and penalties enforced, and bestiality could >be included in current law without re-inventing the wheel. Read above, it was not my doing to make it a sex law, I originally suggested all along that my idea and concept of this WAS to add it to already existing abuse laws, which to me seemed like the most simple thing to do- just add the act to the law. I found out the laws and legislation simply does not work like that, that to even add to an existing law, it still has to go through the entire legislative process just like new legislation. I can see you missed the two cases involving bestiality which were thrown out when the judges were unable to show or prove there was damage done, that was not lost on the militant zoophiles either- a zoophile in France distributed the case information from a French newspaper and called it a victory for zoophiles which he said zoophiles will be happy to use there as a precedent setting case. The other cae was in Plumas county Calif, and the two men involved were given about a 30 day sentence, their computers were returned to them, one of them men had priors in Washington but was never convicted there either. They stated that after the trial they would move to a state where bestiality is LEGAL. That could be YOUR state they will set up shop in. Here is an update on this case # 99-25182 7/26/99 - UPDATE: CALIFORNIA BESTIALITY CASE (Plumas County, CA) A hearing was held on July 22 and a pre-trial conference was scheduled for August 13. The judge ordered that the defendants' computers be returned to them by July 29. Hopefully, a jury trial will be set at that time. 6/24/99: Defendants Rice and Myers, each originally charged with 4 felony counts of cruelty to animals and eight counts of misdemeanor sexual assault, now face just 3 misdemeanor counts after the Plumas County judge threw out felony allegations against them. Judge Ira Kaufman said that the evidence failed to show that there was damage done to the dogs and that the law does not allow sexual assault to be considered as cruel – a factor he called " wrong and incorrect " legislation. Although he stated that it seemed wrong that he could give a 3-year sentence to anyone for hitting a dog with a stick, but can only give them a short jail sentence for sexual assault. The pre-trial hearing was held May 28; they will return to court on July 6 to either resolve the case or schedule a trial. Fax your letter immediately to the following persons. Ask that they receive the maximum sentence under law if they are convicted, and that the dogs not be returned to the defendants; instead they should be adopted out to loving care givers. Mr. James Reichle (head DA), Plumas County District Attorney's Office, Fax #: 530-283-6340. Mr. Jeff Cunan (actual prosecutor of case) Plumas County DA's Office, Fax #: 530-283-6340. Judge Ira Kaufman, Superior Court, Plumas County, Fax #: 530-283-6293. Case background: Defendants Stephen Kennett Rice and Aaron James Myers (case # 99-25182) allegedly forced three out of at least five dogs in their possession to have sex with them over a period of several months, perhaps longer. One defendant has a history of having sexually abused animals in the state of Washington, but was never prosecuted. The dogs were rescued and taken to Plumas County Animal Control and were treated for internal injuries and infections. The defendants freely discuss their preference for bestiality over the Internet and are into violent pornography. =============================== Defendants Stephen Rice and Aaron Myers ( California case # 99-25182) allegedly forced at least six dogs in their possession to have sex with them over a period of several months, perhaps longer. One defendant has a history of having sexually abused animals in the state of Washington, but was never prosecuted. The dogs were rescued and taken to Plumas County Animal Control and are being treated for internal injuries and infections. DNA present in their bodies, as well as confessions by both men to the activities, constitute air tight cases against both men. And, the defendants freely discussed their preference for bestiality over the Internet, are into violent pornography and have stated that after their trial, they will move to a state where bestiality is not against the law. Rice and Myers have each been charged with four felony counts of cruelty to animals and eight counts of misdemeanor sexual assault. Under Sheriff Terry Bergstrand and Plumas County Animal Control officials want Rice and Myers charged and convicted on all counts. A pre-trial hearing is scheduled for May 21 [1999] ; please SNIP Mr. James Reichle (head DA), Plumas County District Attorney's Office, Fax #: 530-283-xxxx Mr. Jeff Cunan (actual prosecutor of case) Plumas County DA's Office, Fax #: 530-283-xxxx Judge Ira Kaufman, Superior Court, Plumas County, Fax # ------------------------------- There is a bestiality law in California but it is a misdemenor, about that of a traffic citation. As you can read, the judge was unable to show there was abuse, so they got off. If the law was Bestiality is a sex crime with mandatory psychiatric, removal of animals and prohibition from owning or working with animals as part of probation then this case would have had a different outcome, and Rice/Myers would be in therapy/treatment for their sexual problems. Instead, they are free to get these animals back, move to another state which has NO law like Missouri, set up shop there, write about and boast about their exploits and help others interested in the " lifestyle " get hooked up with zoophiles and share animals. >strengthening new laws is difficult because Animal Rights activists tend >to want laws that are far too strict and intrusive and can be used in a >selective fashion against anyone who owns a pet and gets on their bad >side. Now that I can agree with, but as you know, NO bill ever comes out in the end the same as it did when it started, so it seems to me anyone wanting a law or anything else, like a lawsuit, damage claim or whatever, starts out with an outrageous demand, and then " compromises " to a lower one and the " victims " then go home going " Phew, we did okay " An example is the infamous San Mateo ordinance wanting mandatory altering of ALL dogs, the " compromise " was instead agreed to with higher license fees, higher unaltered dog fees, etc which is probably what they wanted in the first place! They pursued this (as have other townships) despite studies showing this idea was a dismal failure and that abandonment and euthanasias INCREASED instead of decreased. Next county over around the same time was a very promissing program called the ADOPTion pact, started by a different shelter who made use of an extensive network of volunteer foster homes, breeders, clubs etc. As I recall their goals didn't reach the zero point they hoped but did extremely well WITHOUT a punitive ordinance. >For the geographically challenged, Catherine Hanaway is from St. Louis. >So is your buddy, Greg. St. Louis proper is not very large but is >surrounded by 140 or so suburbs. We consider anything east of >Warrrenton to be " St. Louis " . I can forgive your error since you are >not from here, thank goodness. Yes and the biggest zoophile kingpin of them all who went on the Jerry Springer show promoting bestiality like being gay was from Carl Junction, a stone's thrown from Jefferson City. He owned a mare who he built a special ramp to the door of his trailer for, so he could bring her inside. So he was living in this dumpy I guess 12 by 50 trailer with a mare and another zoophile who had a donkey a Great Dane, a German Shepherd and as Labrador. They set themselves up as a zoophile " outreach support " group, the contact information for more information was flashed on the TV screen at the end of the show. So nation-wide on the Jerry Springer show, Missouri was seen to be the mecca for bestiality as well as the launch point for a group publically going on national TV to offer " support " and help to others interested in buggering animals who: " feel guilty but shouldn't because it's just like being " gay " and there's a bunch more zoophiles just like you out there in the audience who feel the same way and need support of like minded people " >I will not argue your viewpoint on dog clubs and legislation. this is >not news. Dog owners typically do not care about an issue until if >affects them personally. They tend to be self-centered and >self-serving. The judge for a national specialty affects them >personally. Fortunately, there are a few of us with sense who work hard >to save dog clubs and dog breeders from themselves. Yes absolutely, I am glad we agree on that at least. >you speak of your involvement in dog clubs in the past tense. I guess >that means you're no longer involved. That is correct, I saw too many internal conflicts, backspeak about concern of health issues for the public consumption, while ignoring basic genetic and health screening tests, breeding two hypothyroid dogs who were out of parents who had thyroid problems just because they " look so nice " , the $500 trophies, backstabbing of other breeders just because they won the breed and did indeed have great dogs but were ripped up behind their backs by the jealous... and all the rest. My personal donation to one issue involving orthopedics was such that I spent a year letter writing and talking to the board about the issue and convinced them to let me obtain the records the club never had before from OFA. I volunteered to create a database for the club which had neven been done before, and bought my first computer system to do that database. I hand typed all of the AKC, OFA, GDC registration and ownership info for over 1450 dogs, I cross indexed it and created another database of the dogs who were titled and had clearances. I printed up a dozen very nice booklets. No one cared! I still have half of them sitting in a box. I also conducted a " failure to conceive and carry " survey which was another problem reported by many, despite several pleas and mailing out 900 blank survey sheets, including more at the national, only about 12 people bothered to return them. I spent hours communicating with Dr Jean Dodds at hemopet and others, put together my findings along with her suggestions, and again, very few to none cared. After a few of those kinds of incidents, most anyone would give up. > When you swim with the sharks, you will always get bitten! And >speaking of swimming with sharks, you are anit-PETA but think HSUS is >OK? HSUS is full of employees who came from PETA. They all have the >same agenda. I don't currently have much of an opinion of HSUS, I don't like any of them frankly. I also don't like their finances and most of their causes, but at least this group was willing to take all the materials I had and put up a web site subpage devoted to this issue. I dont see dog clubs, breeders, hunters, pet owners, or any others doing that. I don't notice that you recently put up a web site about the sickness of bestiality either... And as far as my life insurance going to HSUS for the bestiality program, that is my safety guard, you see, with the death threats, harrassment, email bombs, threats etc by zoophile ex peers and friends who don't want any law crimping their " lifestyle " , I figured my best insurance policy is to publically state that if anything happens to me unexpectedly, their most hated enemy who is against bestiality will get a large sum as a shot in the arm to continue my effort. That does not mean I *support* the HSUS, but had I not been threatened, I would have left it as it stood to the American Dog Owner's association, and it was only recently I made the change. Now that you have that piece of information which you lacked before, you might see that aspect a little differently. Mike ==================== krohndog wrote: >Animalsav wrote: > I have news for you sir, that kind of legislation has already been passed > elsewhere, and in New York City, and it will be used as models for other > areas. > I am completely opposed to this but the latest new " in thing " is for city > boards to figure that nothing else has worked and more dogs and cats are > abandoned than ever, so now its MANDATORY I am well aware of the issues regarding mandatory spay/neuter ordinances. HSUS, the fine organization that is the beneficiary of your life insurance policy is a huge supporter of such ordinances. > How does a gratification devient SEX crime bill remotely apply to agriculture > or dog shows? > I think you are getting paranoid and not seeing the picture. This bill would > apply to agriculture and dog shows about as much as a bill against child > pornography. No, I'm not paranoid, I'm realistic. you are obviously new at this. I have watched the Animal rights movement slowly but surely attempt to put an end to the sport of pure bred dogs for the past 20 years, and they use the most insidious methods to achieve their goals. Making artificial insemination illegal would be one more means of putting an end to breeding pure bred dogs. The ARAs will use whatever legislative vehicle available to get what they want, and what they want is no more breeding. And I don't care if it's MAAL, the ASPCA, or whomever. At least the ASPCA can't legally lobby. > Would women's groups be happy to see a law giving someone 5 years for beating > a dog but only 1 year for beating his WIFE? Hello! We already have such a law, thanks to the ARAs. Currently, in Missouri, the felony dogfighting statute provides for a five year prison term for dog fighting. I'd be willing to bet that there are plenty of men who have beaten their wives and did not get five years in prison. And I wonder what the maximum prison term is for fighting chickens these days? But that really isn't part of the argument. ============ krohndog wrote: > > You > >missed the nut case who posted nine pages to this list regarding > >proposed Missouri Bestiality Laws. >animalsav wrote: > Thank you for your comments, I would be that " nut case " Oh Gawd, he's back! I had hoped you went away for good. > As I am the person who founded the movement to make bestiality/sexual abuse > of animals a crime, and with my assistant Greg in Missouri > it was *us*, NOT the HSUS or any of the animal rights whackos who convinced > Rep Hanaway to sponsor legislation known as HB 1658 something of which you can truly be proud, no doubt. So, Mr. Know-it-all, why is a Freshman rep from St. Louis sponsoring this bill (Catherine Hanaway) and NOT the good old AR reliables Scott or Daugherty? (never mind - I think I know). Scott and Daugherty had the good sense not to touch it. You had to find a " newbie " to sponsor this one. SNIP ========== >In a message dated 6/7/00 12:19:49 AM, krohndog writes: >I have news for you, Sir, I am a woman. " Kim " is feminine. But that's > " Mrs. Krohn " to you. I would apologise for the oversight but with your antagonistic towards me attitude from the get-go, I think I will skip it. Let me ask you a question, are you always this antagonistic and sarcastic towards people and ignore what they say? Or are you just having a bad week? How does a gratification devient SEX crime bill remotely apply to agriculture or dog shows? I think you are getting paranoid and not seeing the picture. This bill would apply to agriculture and dogshows about as much as a bill against child pornography. >No, I'm not paranoid, I'm realistic. And with you being a woman, you should especially take interest in issues involving forced sex, rape, pedophilia and bestiality etc since this is of concern to women who are largely targets for such abuse. > you are obviously new at this. Actually no, while I always had mixed breeds, I bought my first purebred showdog, a tri-color Collie in 1986, and was quite involved with dog clubs, health issues (especially orthopedic/dysplasia, hypothyroidism, temperament/behaviour and eye anomalies like PRA) I was also the chairman of a genetics disease committee and put together a database for dysplastic dogs. >have watched the Animal rights movement slowly but surely attempt to put >an end to the sport of pure bred dogs for the past 20 years, and they >use the most insidious methods to achieve their goals. Well so have I, including reading the legislative agenda in the AKC Gazette, and other magazines I used to to such as: DogWorld magazine, Doberman Quarterly, Sighthound Review, Collie Review, Showsite, Dane Quarterly, Dogs USA, Dog Fancy, Rottweiler Quarterly, The Alpenhorn, The Fancier, and many others. I kept up with a wide variety of publications, books and also veterinary related publications my Vet loaned me such as the JAVMA I am hardly " new " to dogs or dog issues and I have a two drawer filing cabinet full of materials on dog issues, as well as quite a few articles (including some *I* authored) blasting groups like PeTA, ALF etc and their anti-pet agenda. > Making >artificial insemination illegal would be one more means of putting an >end to breeding pure bred dogs. Oh please, that is a stretch of anyone's imagination and goes into fantasy land,, I tell you none of these groups even wanted to look at the bestiality issue as it was too disgusting and not something anyone wanted to offend members with by publishing articles on this in their newsletters. MAAL has no further connection or interest in this and I don't believe they are bigger that two people with a desktop computer and an answering machine. The bill I helped foster is against *gratification sex* like INTERCOURSE with ANIMALS, you seem to keep missing this on purpose. When was the last time you had a friend mention he had routine intercourse with a dog to perform A.I. for a litter of puppies? >The ARAs will use whatever legislative >vehicle available to get what they want, and what they want is no more >breeding. There are infinate more ways they do that without even touching as disgusting an issue most don't want to hear about like sex with an animal. It is already too late in my opinion to reverse what those A/R's have done, and it's because of complacency and infighting. I saw the same garbage in the dog clubs where on one hand 73 members out of 800 bothered to respond to requests for a general health survey to benefit the breed, but over 500 of them took the time to fill out voting blanks to vote for a national specialty judge! The priorities were not the health of the breed, but the next show judge. The same people refuse to get involved or donate money to groups that fight for the RIGHTS to responsibly own dogs- like the ADOA. The ADOA's all volunteer staff had a budget a few years back of less than $10,000 while one of the bigwig A/R groups dumped a lot more than that in Oregon on one issue to make hunting with dogs illegal. So again, you can see where the animal owning public is, instead of countering the anti animal crowd by backing and financing groups FOR animal owners is spending this money and effort on dog shows, specialty show trophies. I watched one club vote and spent $500 on yet another silver specialty trophy for the national while the breed rescue fund raising drive held AT that national barely took in a two hundred dollars from the hundreds of members who packed the site for 3 days. $20 cash of that was out of my pocket, and another approx $75 of that came from some items I donated to an impromptu auction. Where are the priorities? >The fact of the matter is that most courts do not take animal abuse >seriously, be it sexual or otherwise. That's right, they don't, and many don't evenfollow their own laws on the books. >The answer to the problem is >improvement and enforcement of current laws, not more laws that still >won't be enforced anyway, unless it's selectively. Well I don't have the answer to that and since it seems like no one else did too, I put forth the knowlege that bestiality is LEGAL in Missouri, and that the state is home for a growing not so underground group whose now late leader went on the Jerry Springer show, wrote a book and was VERY open about engaging inbestiality, promoting it as another orientation like being " gay " , went on a documentary filmed by a UK TV station and boasted that the state had NO laws against bestiality and couldn't do a damn thing to him. THAT was when everyone else got involved, the newspapers, Hanaway, the other reps, the radio station I went on etc. People in the UK were reading in the papers about how Missouri has no laws against having sex with animals and that a group promotes it like being gay. I'm sure that was a good family oriented image of the state for the UK viewers. It was my impression that MAAL consists about two people, I talked to a Shiela something and she was new, the impression I got was they had near zero resources or money and are more hype than anything else. >Why are you speaking to them at all? I thought you weren't animal >rights? I was speaking in the past tense, I spoke to the lady there in January or so because they expressed an interest in *helping* the issue, putting up a web site on the issue and printing educational documents I have for their readers etc. I don't care who they are, if they were willing to get my documents, files, information, URL etc out to another 100 people who would help further distribute these items to vets, shelters, mailing lists and their own web sites, then I was going to make use of them. >> Animalsave wrote previously: >> I am not animal " rights " I am and have always been animal WELFARE, anti >Peta, >> Anti ALF etc Animals do not have " rights " but their caretakers have the >> obligation to treat them humanely, as well as raise and kill food animals >> humanely. >> Unfortunately with factory farming and the push for overworked unskilled >> workers to move the kill line faster and faster at slaughterhouses, there >are >> many abuse issues. There is also the issue of worker safety, carpal tunnel, >> injuries etc. >> I eat meat sometimes, less now than before but only due to all the filth, >> bacteria, E-Coli and all the rest of the crap that goes on in the >> slaughterhouses to get those celophane packages to the store that you >don't >> see. Seems every week a new outbreak of some meat bacteria related illness >> hits the news, not to mention the chemicals, hormones, growth stimulants, >> pesticides, fats and all the rest that winds up in that meat too. >All of the above information is AR propaganda! >Been watching Howard >Lymon on Oprah Winfrey, have we? Well I tell you, I don't own a TV, it's rot for the mindless, I DO read the newspapers and when you read the front page and it says that 25 people were taken to the hospital for e-coli and that the USDA reports yet another meat packing plant has recalled 1,000,000 pounds of ground beef because it's tainted, or other similar stories I don't think that is " A/R propaganda " . I also had a friend who worked in a slaughterhouse in the icehouse not the killing floor, one of the big poultry outfits in Missouri, I remember his comments about the Mexicans who didn't speak english, the filth, the push to produce faster, the infection he got from the John in the men's room and all the rest. Didn't exactly sound like a great place to work, that's why he quit after a few weeks. >You are an animal rights activist. Correction again, I am an animal WELFARE advocate with a focus on dogs and pets. You wouldn't be one of the zoophiles by any chance would you ? and that's why you are so opposed to this bill to make sex with animals a crime? It has been my experiance the past 2-1/2 years on this issue that the only people who are against making forced intercourse with dogs a crime are those who engage in sex with animals, or their friends who blindly support them. ====== krohndog I think this can be handled under current animal welfare/cruelty laws. They don't need a new bill as a 'tool' to tinker with agricultural interests and dog show interests. I just don't trust the Missouri Alliance for Animal Legislation (MAAL). Were it not for MAAL, I wouldn't have an issue with this legislation. they will use any and every avenue to put an end to all breeding. The sneaky little b******s tried to pass a bill to institute " animal friendly " license plates. The extra money would have gone into their pockets and there would have been no accountability to the taxpayers! When the Missouri Federation of Animal Owners insisted that the extra money be placed in the Animal Care Facilities Act fund that is used to help animals in times of natural disasters (this was put in place after the 1993 floods), the bill never got passed. We didn't care if they got their license plates, but they sure as heck weren't getting control of the money. No other group has control of the extra money generated from special plates with no accountability to the taxpayers. They would use that money to finance the passage of a mandatory state-wide spay/neuter bill. Here is a small list of websites for hunters to get any and all info available. There is anything you can imagine plus almost all have updates on the Antigun agenda, Animal rights and Anti-hunting groups. <A HREF= " http://www.extreme-hunting.com/ " >Hunting, Extreme-Hunting, Largest Online hunting Resource Center in the World.</A> Borrowing's Official Worldwide Web Site http://www.extreme-hunting.com/ Kim Krohn  <krohndog@s...> Thu Jun 8, 2000 11:30pm sentinent garbage All very true, and guess who the " puppy-mill " is by ARA definition? It's those very breeders! Oh what a sweet, sweet deal for the " animals aren't animals, they're furry humans " crowd. Seen one of the many new AR buzzwords? It's " sentient being " . Yes, they're talking about animals. sen·tient (snshnt, -sh-nt) adj. Having sense perception; conscious: ìThe living knew themselves just sentient puppets on God's stageî (T.E. Lawrence). Experiencing sensation or feeling. Oh, my. Wasn't it Shakespeare who said " crap by any other name is still crap? " , or something like that.   Message 1998 of 2003   Reply Forward View Source    <Marl4570@a...> Thu Jun 8, 2000 11:16pm Urgent..HSUS and Fund for animals are trying to stop more hunting. The anti-hunters are trying to stop all swan hunting in the Pacific Flyway - Utah, Montana and Nevada. They are sending in comments to stop all swan hunting. The Humane Society of the United States and the Fund for Animals have an email comment campaign that we must overcome. They want to stop all swan hunting to protect a few expendable Trumpeter Swan that are incidentally/accidentally killed during the hunt. The comment deadline is in one week, June 17th! Please send a comment like the attached comment today to offset the mail deluge from the antis. Direct all questions to John J. Jackson, III, Chairman of Conservation Force, One Lakeway Center, 3900 N. Causeway Blvd., Suite 1045, Metairie, La 70002-1746, 504.837.1233, (fax) 504.837.1145, JJW-NO@a... , www.conservationforce.org June 8, 2000 Robert Trost USF & WS, Migratory Bird Management Office 911 NE 11th Ave. Portland, Oregon 97232 email: robert_trost@r... fax: 503.231.6228 Re: Comment on the Draft Supplemental Environmental Assessment on the Continuation of General Swan Hunting...65FR15646, extended at 65FR21785 Dear Sir, We fully support the continued hunting of swan in the Pacific Flyway. We join in the comments of the waterfowl management authorities in the states of Utah, Montana and Nevada and the Pacific Flyway Council in support of the continued sport hunt. We support Alternative 1 (preferred alternate), 3b. including Modification 1c., 2c. and 3b. ============== om: Kim Krohn  <krohndog@s...> Thu Jun 8, 2000 5:51pm tap-dancing on the minefield >animalsav wrote: >Well all I can say is lets just hope the federation is smart enough to leave >well enough alone with the bestiality sex crime issue, because it would be a >very negative public relations thing if the bill failed for some reason, and >the federation was publically blamed for it- thereby helping to keep >bestiality legal. ..>I could only imagine how people, especially those A/R groups etc., would >feel about an animal group like the federation's involvement in defeating >legislation against bestiality! I will just say again that the bill was merely monitored by the Federation. You would be wise to not even suggest that the Federation is against the proposed bill OR will be involved with the defeat of the bill - again, you're tap dancing on a legal minefield. The AR groups have the good sense to respect the Federation. You, evidently, do not, but I would strongly suggest that you start. What was your comment about MAAL (the Missouri Animal Rights Lobbying organization)? Something to the effect that they aren't well funded, just consist of a couple of people, don't have a lot of clout, and other such statements. Let me assure you that that is NOT the case with the Federation. I will get out my crystal ball and predict that failure of the bill will be the result of AR groups attaching language to the bill that furthers their agenda and has nothing to do with the original intent of the bill. They are famous for such antics. The " add-ons " will make someone mad in the legislature and the bill will get killed, pure and simple. The AR groups are famous for shooting themselves in the foot when it comes to trying to pass legislation. Here in Missouri, the outdoor and agriculture industries are huge, so anything that is tacked on to legislation that has the potential to interfere with those interests is killed instantly by someone in the legislature. Berosini is right, you speak out of both sides of your mouth. You are using the same tactics that the ARAs use - you've posted plenty of highly emotional graphic language and links on this list.  This is what the ARAs do to generate sympathy, shock, and horror. It's also pretty effective at getting people to open their wallets. We are all adults on this list and a simple " I am against bestiality " statement will suffice. We do not need pictures, charts, descriptions, etc. And I maintain that my argument regarding concern for the bestiality bill in Missouri due to interference with artificial insemination practices is a legitimate one, whether you agree or not, and I am speaking for myself, not the Federation. The animal rights movement is actually an ANIMAL NON-USE MOVEMENT (see Daniel Oliver's book) and the ARAs will use any tactic available to halt the humane and responsible use of animals.  >animalsave wrote: >Ok, we'll see but I do hope that is the case, otherwise it would be like a >child daycare provider helping to defeat child pornography legislation,  >which would have about as much negative public repercussions to them as an >animal federation's involvement with defeating legislation making forced sex >on animals a crime. That's an AR argument if I ever heard one. Thanks to everyone on this list for their support. ============ Interesting how these people are isnt it? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Mike Rolland ASAIRS Administrator Alternate email: rolland_mike Help stop sexual abuse of animals: http://welcome.to/legislation Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.