[ SHOWGSD-L ] Critic speaks against HSUS - WORTH A READ!!!
- From: "Peggy" <pmick12@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <showgsd-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2007 14:18:09 -0500
from the Long Beach (CA) Press-Telegraph
Critic speaks against HSUS
Tom Hennessy, Staff columnist
Article Launched: 10/13/2007 09:38:22 PM PDT
In late August, following the defeat of AB1634, an Assembly bill calling for
mandatory spaying and neutering of dogs and cats, I ran an interview with
Wayne Pacelle, president of the Humane Society of the United States.
He touched on a variety of issues, including his critics.
Patti Strand, director of the National Animal Interest Alliance, asked me to
publish her rebuttal to the Pacelle article. The rebuttal was delayed
several weeks because of a death in her family.
NAIA is based in Portland, Ore. I take neither side in this debate, but note
only that there are deep divisions in the animal rights movement.
Patti Strand is the director of the National Animal Interest Alliance. Her
rebuttal is as follows:
Wayne Pacelle is correct to rank the NAIA as one of the most prominent
critics of the HSUS. We wear that label with honor, many of our
members believing HSUS is corrupt to the bone. This corruption comes down to
three major elements.
First, HSUS allows its financial supporters - ordinary, animal-loving
Americans - to believe it spends an enormous annual tax-free budget of $123
million on caring for animals, when its real agenda is passing extremist
legislation.
Second, HSUS calls itself a mainstream advocacy group,
hiding or downplaying the fact that it has an extremist agenda. HSUS is all
about promoting vegan diets - no meat, no dairy - and ending traditional
human-animal relationships across the board, from agriculture to biomedical
research.
Third, HSUS constantly engages in deceptive propaganda,
half-truths and outright lies in well-funded media campaigns to win its
political and legislative battles. But they are not held accountable for
their tactics because they are a nonprofit group that enjoys political free
speech protections.
NAIA believes it is our responsibility, as animal experts and proponents of
true animal welfare, to point out the facts. What qualifies us to know fact
from fiction? NAIA is rapidly becoming the nation's leading advocacy
organization for animals and the people who actually care for them.
Our members include individuals who interact with animals regularly in a
wide variety of settings. We are pet owners, farmers, researchers, animal
trainers, biologists, sportsmen, animal caretakers, dog and cat breeders and
enthusiasts, educators and entertainers.
Our members have earned their credentials by working with, and in many cases
living with, animals, not by reading philosophical treatises or emotional
propaganda. We support the responsible, traditional and humane use of
animals in agriculture, biomedical research, education, leisure and
recreation, entertainment and companionship. We support and advocate
reasonable, effective and enforceable laws that ensure the humane treatment
of animals and provide penalties for animal abuse.
We support the rights of others to disagree with our views but not to employ
defamation and propaganda to force their views on others.
To recognize HSUS' deception and sit idly by would be to shirk our
responsibility not only as animal experts but as citizens; for we believe
the HSUS is destroying the mainstream animal protection movement.
The shelter issue
Mr. Pacelle also seems baffled that anyone would go after HSUS for not
having shelters because as he stated, "We never said we run local animal
shelters." This is vintage HSUS. They call themselves a humane
society and then blame the public for being confused.
By calling itself the Humane Society of the United States, HSUS rides into
every situation on a "case of mistaken identity" - an identity that, oops,
just happens to raise millions of dollars: the mistaken impression for many
Americans being that it is a humane society rather than a giant propaganda,
lobbying and fundraising machine.
When citizens notice that HSUS' carefully crafted image is at odds with
reality and say so, HSUS responds with another opportunistic spin, saying
that their critics are just people "who don't really care about animals."
Using that logic, maybe humane societies around the country don't really
care about animal welfare either. Many of them have begun putting
disclaimers on their Web sites urging their donors not to confuse them with
the HSUS.
As Pacelle himself stresses, HSUS is a lobbying group. Instead of
representing the humane values of the American public, the well-oiled lobby
and propaganda machine of HSUS virtually assures that the voting public will
be systematically deceived whenever they're asked to vote on an HSUS-backed
measure. The history of successful HSUS ballot initiatives
is a history replete with after-the-event self-flagellation and revulsion by
people who recognized later that they were duped.
To us it appears that the priorities of HSUS, as former employees have
publicly written, are power and money, and that acquiring both justifies the
means. That's where the willingness to deceive comes in. These folks should
make Pinocchio blush.
Alleged strategy
When HSUS sets out to do a ballot initiative, as it plans for next year in
California, they don't just come to town and start promoting their opinion.
Nor do they publish a notice informing voters that as vegans they oppose the
consumption of meat, dairy, and even eggs on their anti-farm ballot
initiatives. Such a statement might raise questions by voters.
Instead, HSUS conducts sophisticated polling to uncover exactly which
messages will work, targeting urban audiences who know little
about husbandry and who just happen to live in the most populated areas
where a media buy will go a long way. Then, they run one deceptive ad one
after another showing heart-wrenchingly gruesome images, often from foreign
countries or showing practices from decades ago, even ones already illegal.
Worse yet, they promote half-truths in support of legislation that in many
cases harms animals, even though these bills further the political goals of
HSUS. The horse slaughter bill and most of the anti-farming initiatives fall
into this classification. HSUS may counter that large companies do major
polling and launch advertising campaigns too, prior to introducing new
products - but there is a big difference.
The difference is this: When corporations market new products, the public at
least recognizes that someone is trying to sell them something. And there
are at least some laws that govern how much blue sky can be sold along with
the product.
In the case of HSUS, PETA, and other fellow travelers in animal rights, the
public only thinks they're regulated and required to be reasonably truthful.
The public doesn't realize that political speech is far more protected than
commercial speech. Thus, HSUS can say pretty much what it wishes and get
away with it.
In the HSUS world of "when did you stop beating your wife" politics, it's
basically Defamation For Dollars. They understand social marketing and use
it to deceive the public into voting away their rights, their economic best
interests, and tragically, the welfare of the animals the public thinks they
are voting to protect.
Keep in mind that HSUS is planning a campaign in California that will affect
the poultry, pork and beef industries. If it follows suit, it will harm not
only California consumers but also the animals themselves.
Tougher for horses
As the American Veterinary Medical Association wrote earlier this week
regarding the misguided HSUS campaign against horse slaughter. Efforts by
groups calling for an end to horse slaughter, such as the Humane Society of
the United States, have led to the closure of the three remaining processing
plants in the United States.
Now, as the AVMA has repeatedly warned, horses are being abandoned in the
United States or transported to Mexico where, without U.S. federal oversight
and veterinary supervision, they are slaughtered inhumanely.
"The reality is, the HSUS has done nothing to address the real issue here,
and, in fact, by seeking to ban horse slaughter, they have made things
significantly worse," says Dr. Mark Lutschaunigm, director of government
relations for the AVMA. "If they really wanted to do something productive to
improve the welfare of horses, they would address the issue of unwanted
horses in the United States."
And the half-truths and lies aren't confined to pushing bad policies in the
United States. Internationally, HSUS was refused entrance into the 2000
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species, for filing false
accusations about CITES member nations.
In the state of Washington, the HSUS-driven Proposition 713, an
anti-trapping ballot initiative, was so misleading, the legislature voted to
overturn it when it became obvious that the voters had been misled.
Floridians saw their pork industry - small as it was - wash out entirely
because of the cost of equipment changes required by the passage of their
anti-gestation confinement, Proposition 204, a measure designed to eliminate
gestation crates used by farmers to protect the lives of piglets.
Next year
When the HSUS-inspired ballot initiative is forwarded next year, NAIA and
its members will be proud to stand with California farmers.
Our membership includes veterinarians, wildlife biologists, and other animal
scientists, dog and cat breeder/enthusiasts, animal trainers, farmers,
ranchers, and others with hands-on experience in animal husbandry and care.
We are fighting a David vs. Goliath battle here. HSUS has regional branch
offices all over America and over $100 million to fight, mislead and
deceive. We at NAIA are a small, mostly unpaid band of hard-working,
hands-on animal people.
Truth, hands-on knowledge, understanding and fair mindedness make us proud
of the company we keep. We are proud that many cities around the country
call on NAIA for expert guidance to draft sensible animal laws. And we feel
validated to be on the same side of the fence as state and federal law
enforcement in the animal welfare debate. We are also proud to stand with
the American farmer, the legions of dog fanciers, and others who are the
real backbone of the mainstream animal welfare movement.
None of them engage in the systematic misrepresentation of issues for profit
and power that we see occurring as standard practice in HSUS and other
conflict fundraising groups.
Unfortunately, it's the average, uninformed American citizen who winds up at
the short end of the stick, thanks to the machinations of HSUS.
But I can tell you this: the animal welfare movement is onto them. And we're
going to keep digging in our heels and telling the truth in our loudest
possible voice.
Tom Hennessy's viewpoint appears Sunday, Tuesday, Thursday
and Friday. He can be reached at (562) 499-1270 or by e-mail at
scribe17@xxxxxxx
============================================================================
POST is Copyrighted 2007. 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 - www.showgsd.org
============================================================================
Other related posts:
- » [ SHOWGSD-L ] Critic speaks against HSUS - WORTH A READ!!!
