[ SHOWGSD-L ] ANTI-PAWS FACT OF THE DAY, Monday, August 5, 2005
- From: RihadinK9@xxxxxxx
- To: showgsd-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2005 23:06:33 EDT
NOTICE: We support the AKC and all of its programs and services. We think it
is the greatest registry in the world. WE DO NOT, HOWEVER, SUPPORT PAWS and
WE DO NOT SUPPORT THE AKC'S SUPPORT OF PAWS!
RADIO FREE AKC publishes the following "Anti-PAWS Fact of the Day" to give
hope to the rapidly growing part of the Fancy who can think for themselves,
are desperate for real leadership and who wants to live in a world free of
PAWS
and its evil twin, the animal rights agenda.
ANTI-PAWS FACT OF THE DAY, Monday, August 5, 2005
A parody of the AKC PAWS FACT OF THE DAY:
To keep our constituents updated on PAWS we are providing the
following information to you. You are receiving this e-mail because you are
listed as a member of an elist or because someone who is a member of an elist
thought you needed to read it:
ANTI-PAWS FACT: The BAIT in our PAWS trap for those gullible enough to fall
for it is that PAWS will help protect dogs by requiring individuals who
import large numbers of dogs for resale to be
licensed and inspected by the USDA. The fact that ILLEGAL
IMMIGRANTS, SUITCASE NUKES, DRUGS, and thousands of other types of
contraband, are imported and manage to get by customs daily is irrelevant,
PAWS is
different, it will work! You can import dogs for your own use and enjoyment
(as
long as you only "use" the animal like we say and as long as it does not
involve breeding) and, it is either our way or the highway. Why? Because we
have decided to go along with the animal rights agenda that is why!
No, we cannot prove large numbers of dogs are being imported. No, we cannot
prove dogs sold over the internet are a big problem. But you should believe
it, because HSUS told us that it is true.
We tell you to go to
http://www.akc.org/canine_legislation/paws_QA.cfm?
page=2&class=showall#35 but all the site really has on it more
unsubstantiated propaganda.
We believe that all commercial breeders are puppy millers like
animal rights' extremists tell us. You have to believe all
commercial breeders sell only sick, underage, and unvaccinated
animals to the pet-buying public because we want these breeders
regulated. Far too many commercial breeders have quit registering their
dogs with us and we are really, really losing a lot of money because of it.
We
want in on the inspection process to force, uh, "encourage" all those
breeders who have been abandoning us to come back under our "protection."
WHAT?
No! What do you mean "protection money?" In no way does this smack of
similar activities engaged in by mob organizations, like Cosa Nostra!
SEE **SPECIAL NOTE** AT THE END OF THIS POST.
To read more about WHY YOU SHOULD OPPOSE PAWS visit:
_http://www.dfow.org/paws.htm_ (http://www.dfow.org/paws.htm)
_http://www.naiaonline.org_ (http://www.naiaonline.org)
_http://www.naiatrust.org/NAIA_Trust_Opposes_PAWS_S1139.htm_
(http://www.naiatrust.org/NAIA_Trust_Opposes_PAWS_S1139.htm)
_http://www.ncraoa.com_ (http://www.ncraoa.com)
_http://www.saova.org_ (http://www.saova.org)
VISIT THIS SITE TO WRITE YOUR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES:
_http://capwiz.com/naiatrust/home_ (http://capwiz.com/naiatrust/home)
If you do not want to receive the ANTI-PAWS FACT of the day, it is
not our fault. You are a pod person. The weed-wackers are after you!
PERMISSION TO CROSSPOST FREELY.
SPECIAL NOTE FROM RADIO FREE AKC:
It is not our intention to make like of real problems should they
exist, however, we are not as gullible as some would have us be.
Section 2131 of the AWA reads, "The Congress finds that animals and
activities which are regulated under this chapter are either in
interstate *or foreign commerce* or substantially affect such
commerce or the free flow thereof, and that regulation of animals
and activities as provided in this chapter is necessary to prevent
and eliminate burdens upon such commerce. . ."
and
Section 2132 of the AWA (definitions) says:
(c) The term "commerce" means trade, traffic, transportation, or
other commerce--
(1) between a place in a State and any place outside of such State,
or between points within the same State but through any place
outside thereof, or within any territory, possession, or the
District of Columbia;
(2) which affects trade, traffic, transportation, or other commerce
described in paragraph (1).[;]
Guess what? The AWA is already worded so that it addresses animals imported
into the United States and/or transported between the states. That wording,
along with the definition of "dealer," gives the USDA the ability to address
any problems arising from the alleged importation of dogs. And, if the AWA
did not address such problems, CDC regulations do, see:
_http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dq/animal.htm#dogs_
(http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dq/animal.htm#dogs) PAWS is simply not needed to
address this ALLEGED problem.
Why are we suddenly subject to what can only be called "import
hysteria?" Because animal rights' groups cannot convince state and local
authorities to enact the restrictive measures that they want
enacted and, if and when they are able to do so, they are unable to get
those laws prosecuted, so they are now seeking federal measures to control
breeding.
DEMAND PROOF THAT THIS IS TRULY A PROBLEM.
Using the same wording, and Section 2133 of the AWA, in
part: "Provided, however, That any retail pet store or other person
who derives less than a substantial portion of his income (as
determined by the Secretary) from the breeding and raising of dogs or cats
on his own premises and sells any such dog or cat to a dealer or research
facility shall not be required to obtain a
license as a dealer or exhibitor under this Act.", the USDA could
already go after most true puppymillers selling dogs/cats via the
Internet for care and quality issues. The fact that a sale occurs
over the Internet should only make proving that the seller is
engaged in interstate commerce, and therefore subject to the AWA, easier.
Why are we suddenly subject to what can only be called "internet
selling" hysteria? Again, because animal rights' groups cannot
convince state and local authorities to enact the restrictive
measures that they want enacted and, if and when they are able to do so,
they are unable to get those laws prosecuted, so they are now seeking federal
measures to control breeding.
It has long been a tactic of animal rights' extremists to create
a "crises," which they cannot prove, and propose a "solution." That
solution always involves an infringement on the rights of
responsible breeders and owners and, in this case, rescuers, and
never addresses the problem it purports to address.
THINK ABOUT IT!
Ginger Cleary, GA
"Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security, will not
have, nor do they deserve, either one." Benjamin Franklin.
_http://www.rihadin.com_ (http://www.rihadin.com/)
============================================================================
POST is Copyrighted 2005. All material remains the property of the original
author and of GSD Communication, Inc. NO REPRODUCTIONS or FORWARDS of any kind
are permitted without prior permission of the original author AND of the
Showgsd-l Management. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
ALL PERSONS ARE ON NOTICE THAT THE FORWARDING, REPRODUCTION OR USE IN ANY
MANNER OF ANY MATERIAL WHICH APPEARS ON SHOWGSD-L WITHOUT THE EXPRESS
PERMISSION OF ALL PARTIES TO THE POST AND THE LIST MANAGEMENT IS EXPRESSLY
FORBIDDEN, AND IS A VIOLATION OF LAW. VIOLATORS OF THIS PROHIBITION WILL BE
PROSECUTED.
For assistance, please contact the List Management at admin@xxxxxxxxxxxx
VISIT OUR WEBSITE - http://www.showgsd.org
============================================================================
Other related posts:
- » [ SHOWGSD-L ] ANTI-PAWS FACT OF THE DAY, Monday, August 5, 2005
