Saturday, March 27, 2010

There are so many games afoot, and animals are the pawns.

Worldwide, there are games afoot with various factions pushing their agendas, redirecting unwelcome attention or protecting their turf...and animals have no voice in this game, they're only the pawns.

1. Past decade if not more - PETA, HSUS and the rest of the "kill 'em" groups - trying to eliminate specific types of animals or domestic animals wholesale, particularly pets. PETA and HSUS are nothing more than well-funded lobby groups pushing anti-animal agendas. Any unthinking dope who spouts "guardian" in reference to their animals is aiding the PETA goal (the game) of having animals removed from the category of property and therefore removing any legislative or common-law right to own property (a pet animal).

2. 2005 - The provincial Liberal government passed an unfounded, unjust, inhumane, vague, shoddy, ineffective and fiscally irresponsible breed ban. This was at a time when the Liberals' public approval rating was very low. The Liberals ignored all the dog experts. The Liberals refused to institute a centralized dog bite registry - gee, I wonder why. One of the Liberals' so-called experts was a dweeb who can't even get the names of dog breeds right. This game was rigged from the start. Couldn't get a word printed in mainstream media to refute the Fibs' rhetoric. The Liberals had absolutely no intention of listening to the people who testified at the committee hearings. McSquinty whipped the Fibs into showing up and voting for the breed ban. This was a done deal before we even heard about it.

3. 2004 and 2005 - The way I read the returns, it appears the Ontario Liberals gave two whacking great hunks of money to the Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals ("OSPCA") - which, being the enforcement body for animal law in the province, would probably be involved in dog fight investigations and dog seizures resulting from the investigations. However, we haven't seen any media trumpeting about any dog fight busts. What's the game here? Was this money from the Ontario government? Why was the money given? What was done with it? And why another great lump in 2008?

N.B. Snipped from OSPCA returns filed with the Canada Revenue Agency
Revenue from provincial/territorial governments
2002 - $ 685,500
2003 - 216,294
2004 - 1,154,760
2005 - 1,268,609
2006 - 285,755
2007 - 653,482
2008 - 2,845,810

4. November 2009 - OSPCA makes animal cruelty busts at Toronto Humane Society ("THS"). Long story well-covered in mainstream media. Current board of directors is charged, cruelty investigator charged, former office worker charged...hard to know who hasn't been charged. The game here consisted of idly wondering about who would turn on whom to save their skin.

5. March 2010 - THS does a public 180 on its euthanasia "policy" and posts on its website that it has killed six dogs (five "pit bulls") and 19 cats. Now, what's this game? Apparently the five "pit bulls" all had no temperament or health issues and had places ready in rescues outside the province; the only issue was the logistics of transporting them through the province (because of the stupid provincial breed ban and even stupider patchwork of municipal breed ban laws). What's the game here? Why the sudden rush to kill the dogs and the cats? Especially since THS had repeatedly refused to work with rescues and allow the dogs to leave the province, preferring to keep them incarcerated for years? (Keep in mind that these dogs would be alive if THS had moved them out of the province.) Was the killing required by the OSPCA? Was it a decision of THS and if so, who made the decision? Don't give me the nameless, faceless "committee" answer. Someone ultimately had to say, "they're toast". Who was it? Why were these dogs and cats killed? Will we ever get a straight answer?

6. Guess the game in #5 eliminates the game in #4.

Y'ever get the feeling that you'd like to leave for an island with no government and no politics?
Take your animals with you.
And go without anyone else. As soon as there are two or more people, there's politics. exposed

The post on KC Dog Blog about the truth behind is a must-read. It's a very thoughtful, objective analysis (unlike this blog *grin*).

As commenters mention, it's frightening that a group gets quoted without having any credentials, solely to provide "both sides". How can you justify promoting the opinions of a group with absolutely no credentials, who want to kill animals solely because of appearance?

Dog owners are a visually identifiable group. Does pushing a personal agenda of vengeance qualify as a hate group?

Tuesday, March 23, 2010

This child will really thank McGuinty in future years...

Now, why isn't the dog's breed in the headline?

The child is a victim, I am very sorry for her.