[animalcraker]

Story Here

What are your thoughts on this? The comments below that article are also somewhat interesting/amusing to read.

 

[Spicy1_VV]

Waste of money. Of course the HSUS wants more of it however they can get it right.

 

[skelaki]

I wouldn't waste my money on any organization of HSUS's ilk.

 

[KYASHI]

EVERYONE needs to stay away from anything that has to do with the HSUS. If they get what they want then all of your animals. Dogs, cats, birds, fish, etc. will be put to sleep and it will be illegal to own anything not human. They are fanatics with nothing better to do than try to run everyone else's lives. Pass the word on. Americans need to stand up to these orginizations and let them know we are not going to take it anymore. Our pets are family and they are messing with your canine kids. If we dont then you can kiss our beloved pets goodbye soon.

 

[KaseyT]

EVERYONE needs to stay away from anything that has to do with the HSUS. If they get what they want then all of your animals. Dogs, cats, birds, fish, etc. will be put to sleep and it will be illegal to own anything not human. They are fanatics with nothing better to do than try to run everyone else's lives. Pass the word on. Americans need to stand up to these orginizations and let them know we are not going to take it anymore. Our pets are family and they are messing with your canine kids. If we dont then you can kiss our beloved pets goodbye soon.

Maybe on whatever alternate universe you live on this ridiculous hyperbole is true, but certainly not this one.

 

[JohnnyBandit]

Maybe on whatever alternate universe you live on this ridiculous hyperbole is true, but certainly not this one.

Kyashi's comment while extreme was not really that far off base.

The HSUS is not a friend to pet owners in any way, shape, or form.

The HSUS may have started as an animal welfare organization. But it underwent a transformation about the time PETA came into being. New personel, new agendas.

Shortly after the current director, Wayne Pacelles took over, they merged with the Fund for Animals and Doris Days organization.

The transformation is complete. The HSUS is nothing more than a lobbying and fundraising arm of the radical animal rights movement.

 

[Pai]

Any organization run by a man who says this:

“We have no ethical obligation to preserve the different breeds of livestock produced through selective breeding. One generation and out. We have no problem with the extinction of domestic animals. They are creations of human selective breeding.” Wayne Pacelle, Senior VP of Humane Society of the US, formerly of Friends of Animals and Fund for Animals, Animal People, May, 1993.

and

“I don’t have a hands-on fondness for animals…To this day I don’t feel bonded to any non-human animal. I like them and I pet them and I’m kind to them, but there’s no special bond between me and other animals.” Wayne Pacelle, of the Humane Society of the United States, quoted in Bloodties: Nature, Culture and the Hunt by Ted Kerasote, 1993, p. 251.

...Is an organization any pet-loving person should avoid touching with a 10-foot pole. Support your LOCAL shelters and rescues, volunteer your time and money to help to animals in your own communities, don't waste your resources on the HSUS which doesn't even run a shelter and that spends most of it's money on ads to raise more money to make more ads. =P

 

[KaseyT]

Any organization run by a man who says this:

“We have no ethical obligation to preserve the different breeds of livestock produced through selective breeding. One generation and out. We have no problem with the extinction of domestic animals. They are creations of human selective breeding.” Wayne Pacelle, Senior VP of Humane Society of the US, formerly of Friends of Animals and Fund for Animals, Animal People, May, 1993.

and

“I don’t have a hands-on fondness for animals…To this day I don’t feel bonded to any non-human animal. I like them and I pet them and I’m kind to them, but there’s no special bond between me and other animals.” Wayne Pacelle, of the Humane Society of the United States, quoted in Bloodties: Nature, Culture and the Hunt by Ted Kerasote, 1993, p. 251.

...Is an organization any pet-loving person should avoid touching with a 10-foot pole. Support your LOCAL shelters and rescues, volunteer your time and money to help to animals in your own communities, don't waste your resources on the HSUS which doesn't even run a shelter and that spends most of it's money on ads to raise more money to make more ads. =P

You judge an entire organisation by what one person said 15 years ago while in his twenties?

Here is the HSUS Statement of Policy approved by the board of directors. Everything HSUS does is bound by this policy. Read it and tell my what specifically you disagree with.

http://www.hsus.org/about_us/statements/

 

[Pai]

You judge an entire organisation by what one person said 15 years ago while in his twenties?

And that has hired unrepentant former ALF members to high level positions within the organisation? You bet I do.
I don't need to get into another argument over the HSUS with you Kasey, I know full well your opinion.

 

[JohnnyBandit]

You judge an entire organisation by what one person said 15 years ago while in his twenties?

Here is the HSUS Statement of Policy approved by the board of directors. Everything HSUS does is bound by this policy. Read it and tell my what specifically you disagree with.

http://www.hsus.org/about_us/statements/

I judge the organization by their actions and words of the organization and their staff.

Look around....It is not just Pacelles.

All one has to do is look at the organizations activities, who they give money to, and what legislation they support, etc and it will become very clear that they are not an animal welfare organization but rather a radical animal rights organization.

Anyone that donates or supports the organization is actually helping them work towards restrictions and possibly ending pet ownership.

 

[KaseyT]

I judge the organization by their actions and words of the organization and their staff.

Look around....It is not just Pacelles.

All one has to do is look at the organizations activities, who they give money to, and what legislation they support, etc and it will become very clear that they are not an animal welfare organization but rather a radical animal rights organization.

Anyone that donates or supports the organization is actually helping them work towards restrictions and possibly ending pet ownership.

Specifically what actions and legislation?

 

[JohnnyBandit]

Specifically what actions and legislation?

Kasey..... I would be more than happy to discuss this with you again. I do believe we have discussed this very issue with previously on another thread.

I am doubtful I will change your opinion on HSUS. But I am not going to get into an in depth debate at midnight. So our conversation will have to continue tomorrow.

In the mean time you might find this interesting reading.
This is not from any of the organizations I currently belong to that focuses quite a bit of their attention on combating HSUS.

But rather a consumer advocacy group that has nothing to do with dogs, pets, hunting or anything else. It simply warns potential donors about what may happen to their funds.

http://www.activistcash.com/organization_overview.cfm/oid/136

As much as I hate to say this.... If someone chose to donate to an animal rights organization, their money would be more likely to acheive some of their goals if they donated to PETA over HSUS.

 

[peppy264]

You judge an entire organisation by what one person said 15 years ago while in his twenties?

Here is the HSUS Statement of Policy approved by the board of directors. Everything HSUS does is bound by this policy. Read it and tell my what specifically you disagree with.

http://www.hsus.org/about_us/statements/

I would disagree with the following:

We support the enactment and enforcement of animal control ordinances designed to regulate, deter, and reduce companion animal breeding,

The HSUS opposes the hunting of any living creature ....

The HSUS opposes the killing of marine mammals for commercial, sport, ....

The HSUS opposes the trapping, rearing on "fur ranches," and killing of animals for the production of fur apparel and accessories.

he HSUS advocates an end to the use of animals in research and testing that is harmful to the animals.

Also you get the feeling reading their policies that they really also want to say that we should not have any domesticated agricultural animals.

Their strident opposition of the seal hunt in Canada makes me believe they may be an organization, like Greenpeace, more concerned with self promotion and fundraising than their supposed fundamental goals. Saving baby seals, like saving old growth forests, make good TV, but is hardly a fundamental issue. I don't know much about HSUS but if they are 1/2 as morally bankrupt as Greenpeace then pet owners everywhere should shun and work to discredit them.

 

[skelaki]

In my opinion those that support HSUS fall into 3 basic categories:

1. Animal Rights extremists
2. Those ignorant of HSUS's true agenda
3. Contrarians who may not actually support the agenda and may even be ignorant of it but who just like to take the opposite stand in any debate or argument.

 

[KaseyT]

I would disagree with the following:

We support the enactment and enforcement of animal control ordinances designed to regulate, deter, and reduce companion animal breeding,

This statement in context.

The number of companion animals in need of good homes is greater than the number of responsible homes available. This results in millions of companion animals either suffering on the streets or being euthanized by local shelters. The HSUS therefore urges people to spay or neuter their companion animals and to solve pet behavior and other problems that may lead to pet relinquishment.

The HSUS also urges humane organizations and animal care and control agencies to require that all animals be sterilized before release for adoption unless medically inappropriate and to encourage the spaying and neutering of companion animals within their communities. We support the enactment and enforcement of animal control ordinances designed to regulate, deter, and reduce companion animal breeding, and we encourage cooperation between animal shelters and veterinarians in implementing sterilization programs and other solutions to the problem of companion animal homelessness.

I'm pretty sure this same sentiment has been regularly echoed on this board by all the bashers of HSUS.

The HSUS opposes the hunting of any living creature ....

The HSUS opposes the killing of marine mammals for commercial, sport, ....

The HSUS opposes the trapping, rearing on "fur ranches," and killing of animals for the production of fur apparel and accessories.

he HSUS advocates an end to the use of animals in research and testing that is harmful to the animals.

Also you get the feeling reading their policies that they really also want to say that we should not have any domesticated agricultural animals.

They are, after all, a humane society. Would you expect them not to be opposed to hunting, trapping, whaling, fur farming, animal testing, etc?

Their strident opposition of the seal hunt in Canada makes me believe they may be an organization, like Greenpeace, more concerned with self promotion and fundraising than their supposed fundamental goals. Saving baby seals, like saving old growth forests, make good TV, but is hardly a fundamental issue. I don't know much about HSUS but if they are 1/2 as morally bankrupt as Greenpeace then pet owners everywhere should shun and work to discredit them.

You actually expect a humane organisation to not stridently oppose this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uwxHAIA3X6M

What is essentially the moral equivalent of clubbing 300,000 puppies to death for only their fur?

 

[reverend_maynard]

If even half of the stuff in the article that JohnnyBandit is true, then I would have to guess that the vast majority of donors sending money to HSUS fall under skelaki's category 2.

Do you think a significant percentage of the donors who sent 100s of millions to HSUS realized that "In 2002, the multi-million-dollar conglomerate gave less than $150,000 to hands-on humane societies and animal shelters."? I don't.

While I don't agree with the majority of their agenda, I don't see any problem with them pursuing it. I think their underhanded fund raising tactics are what makes them despicable.

 

[KaseyT]

But rather a consumer advocacy group that has nothing to do with dogs, pets, hunting or anything else. It simply warns potential donors about what may happen to their funds.

http://www.activistcash.com/organization_overview.cfm/oid/136

Here's you "consumer advocacy group"

The Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF) (formerly called the "Guest Choice Network") is a front group for the restaurant, alcohol and tobacco industries. It runs media campaigns which oppose the efforts of scientists, doctors, health advocates, environmentalists and groups like Mothers Against Drunk Driving, calling them "the Nanny Culture -- the growing fraternity of food cops, health care enforcers, anti-meat activists, and meddling bureaucrats who 'know what's best for you.' "

Over 40 percent of the group's 2005 expenditure was paid to Rick Berman's PR company, Berman & Co. for "management services. [1] As part of its operations CCF runs a series of attack websites, including "consumerfreedom.com, activistcash.com, cspiscam.com, animal-scam.com, fishscam.com, obesitymyths.com, physiciansscam.com [and] PetaKillsAnimals.com. [2]

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Center_for_Consumer_Freedom

 

[lovemygreys]

HSUS - anti-pet organization that collects money to further their own political agendas and pay themselves nice salaries. Actual, REAL animals helped: zero (or close to it).

They can keep their "degrees"

It really irks me that their "leader" owns greyhounds.

 

[peppy264]

They are, after all, a humane society. Would you expect them not to be opposed to hunting, trapping, whaling, fur farming, animal testing, etc?

I would expect them to be opposed to inhumane methods of hunting, etc and opposed to animal testing in certain instances (e.g. cosmetic companies) but not to make such a generalized statement, which is, as written, extreme.

 

[reverend_maynard]

Here's you "consumer advocacy group"

The Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF) (formerly called the "Guest Choice Network") is a front group for the restaurant, alcohol and tobacco industries. It runs media campaigns which oppose the efforts of scientists, doctors, health advocates, environmentalists and groups like Mothers Against Drunk Driving, calling them "the Nanny Culture -- the growing fraternity of food cops, health care enforcers, anti-meat activists, and meddling bureaucrats who 'know what's best for you.' "

Over 40 percent of the group's 2005 expenditure was paid to Rick Berman's PR company, Berman & Co. for "management services. [1] As part of its operations CCF runs a series of attack websites, including "consumerfreedom.com, activistcash.com, cspiscam.com, animal-scam.com, fishscam.com, obesitymyths.com, physiciansscam.com [and] PetaKillsAnimals.com. [2]

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Center_for_Consumer_Freedom

Instead of attacking the source with another equally biased source, would you care to refute any of the particulars of the article posted?