Note: Personally, I can not even watch this. It cam to me in a Facebook message and the preamble was horrible enough.
From: Paul AndBaby York-Vegan via Igualdad Animal / Animal Equality
The horror of being buried alive, S.Korea. They know what's going on. That's why they're screaming, in this video. This is like watching a video of the gas chambers in operation in WWII. Horrific, but necessary for the world to see. Please pass it on. We must end humanity's incredible crimes against all animals. Going vegan is a major step.
Note To My Critics:
Saturday, February 26, 2011
Note: Personally, I can not even watch this. It cam to me in a Facebook message and the preamble was horrible enough.
Posted by Patty Ann at 9:48 AM
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
This process is extremely hard to digest, but we believe it is not propelled by cruelty, but rather by ignorance and lack of awareness to animal needs. The workers do not think to kill the animal before they begin, and are not aware of the animal's suffering. Our commitment is to provide enlightenment. It is our moral obligation to these animals. If we shut our eyes this will not go away!
תורגם באדיבות: "חבר המתרגמים"
more..PTROA - Stand By Animals In China
Saturday, February 19, 2011
posted by: Mac McDanielStop Animal Exploitation Now (SAEN) has released data on the most painful animal experimentation labs in the United States.
SAEN updated its registry of the most painful vivisection labs last week, now including data up through 2009, which is the most recent year for which information is available.
The report criticizes both animal testing itself and the ways in which data about animal testing are collected.
SAEN bases its "most painful labs" report on data describing how often animals used in experimentation are subjected to what is called "unrelieved pain," that is, experimentation where animals are subjected to painful tests without relief, tranquilizers, anesthesia, analgesia or euthanasia.
Federal guidelines dictate that animals can only endure unrelieved pain when scientifically necessary for the purposes of research, and it should come as no great surprise that it is very frequently scientifically necessary to subject animals to unrelieved pain.
SAEN says that the accuracy of data for unrelieved pain can suffer from simple clerical errors, as well as different interpretations of what unrelieved pain can mean. For example, some labs list animals that have been deprived of food or water in the category of unrelieved pain, while others do not.
Utah and Georgia both have two facilities, each in the top ten of the list, with Utah's two biggest public universities -- Utah State University and University of Utah -- ranking 2nd and 6th respectively. The most painful lab in the country is the Aberdeen Proving Ground, a facility controlled by the US Army in Maryland.
A spokesman for the University of Utah makes the baffling claim that experimenting on animals without pain relief doesn't necessarily mean the animals are in pain.
The simple fact that a list like this one exists is proof of the horrifying nature of animal testing. The concept of unrelieved pain and intentionally depriving animals of food and water is something that can be recorded and registered on a chart like any other data. We have institutionalized animal suffering to such an extent that the idea of an animal being tortured or starved becomes a data point on a spreadsheet, instead of what it actually is: a tragedy.
Vivisection works because people are unaware of what happens in labs and even when they find out what happens, they are assured that the end justifies the means; that animal testing is important to solving human ills. The disturbing fact is that not only is the treatment of animals in labs horrifying beyond all human comprehension, but that the suffering is often entirely in vain. Studies show that a majority of doctors have misgivings about applying animal-tested medicines to humans.
Vivisection is not only horrifying and ethically abhorrent, but scientifically unreliable. Furthering alternative research methods will not only produce more reliable data, but will forego the need to torture animals entirely.
Posted by Patty Ann at 8:10 AM
Tuesday, February 15, 2011
Why shelters say ‘no’ to rescue groups, and why it has to stop | PetConnection.com
By Christie Keith
Are shelters that close their doors to rescue groups protecting animals, or their own power?
The battle over New York State’s proposed law to prohibit shelters from killing animals if qualified rescue groups are willing to take them has heated up again with the bill’s reintroduction.
Now, the reason the big shelters give for opposing this law is that they believe “hoarders” and unqualified rescue groups will come get animals, and they want to hold onto the right to approve or disapprove whether a rescue group can take their “death row” pets.
However, since if the bill passes there will be significant restrictions on who can and can’t take animals, and what animals can be rescued, I don’t think that’s the real issue. I believe what’s really eating at shelters opposing this bill is that it will be the law, not the shelters themselves, that controls access to those animals. I think they resist the loss of power, and in some cases, the possible exposure to criticism and whistleblowing on conditions in their facilities they fear access could bring.
One of the reasons I believe the whole “hoarder/bad rescuer” objection is just an excuse is that we’ve had a right of shelter access — known as The Hayden Law — here in California for more than a decade now. While there have been a few (a very few) times when there were bad outcomes from rescuers taking pets who would otherwise have been killed, the opposite problem is extremely common.
Hardly a week goes by that I don’t hear from a rescuer being denied access illegally — and despite my telling them their rights and in some cases offering to help them get pro bono legal representation, they’re afraid to do anything about it because they believe the shelters will retaliate by cutting off their access to the animals entirely.
That is why it is completely unacceptable to let the very shelters these laws are meant to regulate be the gatekeepers of access for rescue groups.
The shelter industry is essentially arguing it should be allowed to regulate itself, and that anyone who suggests otherwise is being “divisive” or attacking them. But no industry should self-regulate; not agriculture, not drug companies, not restaurants, not donation-soliciting charities, not hair salons, not Wall Street. The more we have relied on self-regulation in these industries, the more catastrophic have been the outcomes. Witness what’s just happened to our economy.
The shelter industry, frankly, is sounding more like agribusiness to me on this issue than like an animal welfare organization.
Furthermore, their concerns are misplaced. The proposed New York law has far more restrictions placed on rescue groups than the California law. It has exemptions for dogs who have been found to be dangerous, and those with serious illnesses and injuries. And of course, if a shelter doesn’t want a “death row” pet to go with the rescuer for some reason, all they have to do is not kill that pet — this law is only for animals who would otherwise be killed.
But that’s not enough. By opposing this law, they’re saying they don’t want shelter access to be a right, but at their discretion. They want to say who can save an animal, and who can’t. And they’ll frighten you with the specter of hoarding, propelled by the profit-hungry television machine that’s currently gorging on hoarder-mania, and the far-fringe of the animal rights movement that thinks animals are better off dead than in the care of human beings. Great company to hang out with, guys. Seriously.
This law is not just good for New York, it’s good for every state. And this obsession with holding onto power is particularly chilling considering that so many “shelters” all over the country are nothing more than hellholes and death factories, and yet they still insist they have the right to decide who is a “good” rescuer and who is a “bad” rescuer.
Animal advocates need to understand that codifying a right that saves animal lives — and, by the way, saves shelters money — in a responsible manner is not a threat to them.
I understand that there are symbolic issues here; the law, dubbed “Oreo’s Law,” was named after a pit bull killed by New York City’s ASCPA despite the fact that a rescue group was willing to take her. As a human being with feelings, I can understand that the ASPCA feels attacked by this law; it is, indeed, meant to prevent them from doing anything like that again.
But they fought the law to a standstill last year. They’ve made their point. They should admit that laws like this are good for animals and good for shelters — something they clearly already know, given that when current head of the ASPCA Ed Sayres was head of a shelter here in California, he supported the Hayden Law, despite the fact that it has far fewer safeguards than the New York law includes.
I call on all New York State shelters to embrace this law. If the name really bothers you that much, promise to support the law if the name’s changed.
But if you’ve got nothing more than a desire to hold onto power and a bruised ego over a name? Get over it. It’s time.
Sunday, February 13, 2011
Follow The Link To See Pitchers of Pigeon Killers: http://www.sharkonline.org/?P=0000000982
Psychopaths with guns.
The "upper crust" elitist members of the Philadelphia Gun Club don't like to have their low-brow animal abuse exposed when they shoot live pigeons tossed out of boxes. Watch as attorney Sean M. Corr commits assault in an effort to stop video documentation.
Mr. Corr was eventually issued a citation and pleaded guilty. A copy of the citation can be seen here:
You can watch gun club members intentionally fire on a boat at: http://tinyurl.com/yc27by9.
Bensalem police have refused to take any action in that clear case of reckless endangerment.
On a Personal Note: This is not the first time I've posted this particular Video. My plan is to spread the word about Attorney Sean M. Corr's Thuggish, Psychopathic nature far & wide. Notice the look of pure undiluted hatred on the face of this piss poor intimation of a man. This is how a Psychopath reacts when someone documents via video that his favorite pastime is torturing helpless birds. Stay Classy Attorney Sean M. Corr, stay classy.
Humane Roxi Patricia - thanks so much for posting. This will only end with enough constituent pressure. Even if you have called a million times before, please make sure to let your legislators know that you want them to end these horrible contests. And please urge your friends to do the same. On a holiday - you can leave messages on their answering machines. Please let us know what they say - you can find them here: http://www.legis.state.pa.
Saturday, February 12, 2011
The Video The Meat Industry Does Not Want You To See
By Nathan Runkle
Mercy For Animals
Narrated by Oscar-nominee James Cromwell, this powerful 12-minute film takes you on an eye-opening exploration behind the closed doors of the nation’s largest industrial poultry, pig, dairy and fish farms, hatcheries, and slaughter plants – revealing the often-unseen journey that animals make from Farm to Fridge.
Using arresting images covertly recorded on hidden camera, this provocative film puts into focus the harsh reality faced by farmed animals – creatures granted no federal protection from abuse during their lives on factory farms.
Challenging society’s views and treatment of “food animals,” Farm to Fridge elevates our moral and ethical discussion about where our food comes from, how it is produced, and who is left to pay the ultimate price for cheap meat, dairy and eggs.
This film is guaranteed to change the way you look at the power, and consequences, of your food choices.
You can watch this life-changing film for free below, or online at MeatVideo.com. After viewing Farm to Fridge, I encourage you to share it with your friends on Facebook, order a free copy to screen in your community, and request a free Vegetarian Starter Kit.
I hope you find MFA’s new film informative, motivational, and moving. Together we can protect farmed animals from abuse, and inspire others to explore cruelty-free food choices.
Friday, February 11, 2011
Valentines … For the Birds!
During midwinter, when food is scarce for wildlife, why not show some love for backyard birds while decorating your yard for Valentine’s Day?
These cheerful decorations can be eaten by birds and are made with ingredients you may already have or can easily pick up at your local supermarket. They can even be made by young children, with a little help from an adult. Hang them up outside—it’s a great opportunity for bird-watching when your feathered friends come to snack on the treats!
What you need:
- 1 ½ cups of oatmeal (instant is fine)
- 1 cup vegetable shortening or suet
- ½ cup peanut butter
- 1 ½ cups cream of wheat cereal, uncooked
- 1 ½ cups corn meal
- red food coloring (optional)
- large bowl
- mixing spoon
- measuring cups
- heart-shaped cookie cutter
- plate or shallow pan for birdseed
- any kind of string, ribbon, or yarn, cut into 12 inch lengths
- cookie sheet
- sunflower or other bird seed
- chopstick or pencil
What You Do:
1. Preheat oven to 350 degrees.
2. Cook oatmeal according to package directions (microwave in large bowl). Add other ingredients in bowl, stirring first with spoon; you can use your hands when mixture gets too stiff.
3. Sprinkle some flour on your working surface and on your hands. Take a tennis-ball sized handful of dough and place it on the floured surface. Flatten the dough to about ½-inch thick. Cut out as many heart shapes as you can. You can dip the hearts into a dish of birdseed to coat them or press seeds into the heart to create a design.
4. Using a chopstick or pencil, make a hole through each heart (for where the string will go).
5. Place hearts on ungreased cookie sheet. Bake 15-20 minutes, until lightly brown. Cool on pan.
6. When completely cool, tie strings through holes. Hang outdoors from trees or shrubs.
7. See who comes to eat them!
Photo by Elizabeth Scholl
Posted by Patty Ann at 4:04 PM
Thursday, February 10, 2011
Cleveland Metropark Murder Squadby Dominique Jean Osh on Tuesday, February 8, 2011 at 11:43pm
The Cleveland Metropark Murder Squad is presently slaughtering deer in the Bedford reservation.
They counted 60 deer in the Bedford reservation but are targeting 65,
Whitehead Meats who have processed the corpses in past years said. "They come in nice and clean, heads cut off and fetuses removed; ya know they have to keep count of the fetuses."
Not only do the park employees get a great perk by getting to kill the deer in a hailstorm of bullets, sometimes they get added enjoyment since they admit (Open Public Records report) that they have to shoot some twice because they don't die immediately. Then, as an added bonus the park psychopaths get to decapitate and cut out fetuses. What do you suppose they do with them?
You can be sure to see blood-soaked snow all over the park each morning after a massacre.
This is the 13rh year of genocide in the parks. They must not continue to get away with murder. We must expose their lies and their cruelty,
Please help expose them.
Call or email the following park gestapo. UNnecessary to be polite. They never answer their phones so if you prefer leave a message and feel free to express yourself in any way you want.
John Mack--Head of Natural Resources
Rick Tyler--park biostitute
Posted by Patty Ann at 7:03 AM
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
Our First Amendment rights are under attack!
Fight the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (S. 3880)
The Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (AETA) defines as “terrorism” causing any business classified as an "animal enterprise" (e.g., factory farms, fur farms, vivisection labs, rodeos, zoos and circuses) to suffer a profit loss and is punishable by a long prison sentence -- even if the company's financial decline is caused by peaceful protests, boycotts, media campaigns or leafleting.
Defining non-violent activist tactics that cause exploitive corporations to lose profit but don't physically hurt anyone as "terrorism" is both a deceptive misapplication of a serious term and a completely unacceptable violation of our Constitutionally-granted First Amendment rights to freedom of speech. Industry groups pushed the AETA through Congress quickly and with little public scrutiny.
The AETA was unanimously passed in the Senate on September 29th and on November 13th it was passed in the House with only 5 Representatives voting. President Bush signed the AETA into law on November 27th.
Read the full text of the bill here.
Click Here for a law review article of the AETA
WHAT YOU CAN DO:
Keep the issue alive among members of Congress by contacting your two senators (www.senate.gov) and representative (www.house.gov) periodically, using the following arguments:
1. It was passed by a voice vote of only five Representatives as a non-controversial bill.
Far from being non-controversial, AETA was explicitly opposed by more than 160 groups and thousands of constituents. The opposition includes such influential groups as the National Lawyers Guild., New York City Bar Association, Natural Resources Defense Council, Humane Society of the U.S., League of Humane Voters, Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, and the American Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA).
2. It is excessively broad and vague.
The Act defines an animal enterprise very broadly to include any enterprise that uses or sells animals or
animal products. It also covers any person or entity having a connection with an animal enterprise. This combination includes virtually any enterprise. The Act does not specify that the interference be conducted for the purpose of protecting animals, so it applies to any form of advocacy. Moreover, the Act punishes mere attempts at interference as well as mere communication with individuals who attempt such interference. The net result is that almost any interference with virtually any institution across state lines could be charged under the Act. This may well include sending an e-mail across state lines that calls for picketing of a soft drink company that sponsors a rodeo.
3. It imposes disproportionate punishment.
Section 43(b)(1) of the Act provides a fine and imprisonment up to a year for actions that do not instill fear of bodily injury or death or cause any economic damage. Other penalties under the Act greatly exceed 2005 federal sentences for comparable offenses reported by the U.S. Sentencing Commission.
4. It brands as ‘terrorists’ and denies equal protection under the law to animal advocates.
Despite its broad and vague wording, the Act clearly intends to single out animal advocates for ‘terrorist‘ branding and severe federal penalties. Individuals charged with terrorism face ostracism and hardships.
5. It brands as ‘terrorism’ and imposes severe penalties on civil disobedience.
The Act provides particularly severe penalties for nonviolent illegal activities like civil disobedience, which has been the most effective tactic of the civil rights and other social justice movements. The brave activists who crossed state lines to sit in at “white only” lunch counters could have been branded as ‘terrorists’ and charged under the Act.
6. It has a chilling effect on all forms of protest by endangering free speech and assembly.
The prospect of costly fines and long prison terms is likely to deter many social justice and life affirming activists from engaging in protest activities because most of their target enterprises fall within the Act’s broad definition. For example, students protesting low wages or high tuition at a university could be charged under the Act because the university is an “academic enterprise that uses animals … for education, research, or testing.”
7. It sets back investigation of federal law violations by animal enterprises.
Many of the biomedical enterprises that promoted the Act are repeat violators of federal law dealing with animal welfare. Much of the evidence leading to these convictions has been procured through undercover investigations, or whistle blowing, which are outlawed under the Act.
8. It detracts from prosecution of real terrorism against the American people.
Since the tragedy of 9/11, U.S. law enforcement agencies have been remarkably successful in preventing additional terrorist activities. Yet, their resources are taxed to the extent that they are unable to adequately monitor our borders, ports, trains, chemical plants, water purification plants, and other potential sources of terrorist activity. Monitoring social activists imposes an unnecessary and misdirected additional burden on these agencies and threatens their continued success.
For more information on the AETA, visit www.GreenIsTheNewRed.com, www.NoAETA.org and www.StopAETA.org.
Posted by Patty Ann at 10:25 AM
Saturday, February 5, 2011
The Devil is real and he wears a Lab Coat.
Another sad and serious post; Please take the time to sign the Farm Sanctuary Petition
Urge the University of Mississippi Medical Center to Stop Abusing Pigs in Student Labs.
Farm Sanctuary Petition
Friday, February 4, 2011
PORT CHARLOTTE, Fla. — The wandering 65-pound Pit Bull mix might have seemed menacing to some passerby, but one woman will always remember him as her “guardian angel.”The dog, which authorities think is lost and not a stray, successfully thwarted a robbery attack on a mother and her 2-year-old son, who were held at knifepoint Monday afternoon.
The Florida woman, who has been identified by authorities simply as “Angela,” was leaving a playground with her toddler son in Port Charlotte when a man approached her in the parking lot with a knife and told her not to make any noise or sudden movements.
Angela didn’t have to do either to protect herself and her child — a dog mysteriously ran to the scene and charged the man, who quickly fled.
“I don’t think the dog physically attacked the man, but he went at him and was showing signs of aggression, just baring his teeth and growling and barking. It was clear he was trying to defend this woman,” Animal Control Lt. Brian Jones told Pet Pulse.
“I don’t know what this man’s intentions were, but it is very possible this dog saved her life.”
The exceptional part of the story, Jones said, is that the dog had never met or even seen the people it quickly jumped to defend. “You hear about family dogs protecting their owners, but this dog had nothing to do with this woman or her kid,” Jones said. “He was like her guardian angel.”
After the alleged thief ran away, Angela quickly placed her son, Jordan, in the car and tried to drive off. Before she could, though, the dog jumped into her backseat, waiting with her for the police and animal control officers to arrive at the scene.
The dog was transported to a local shelter and if his owners don’t step forward within five days, Jones said, Angela and her family plan to adopt the savior she named “Angel.” Animal control officers and shelter workers believe Angel is lost, and not a stray, because of his good health, sturdy weight and mild temperament.
“It’s funny, that someone’s irresponsibility could have saved someone’s life,” Jones said of Angel’s possible owners.
For Angela, it doesn’t matter where the dog came from, just that he was there when she needed him most. “I don’t know what his [the thief's] intentions were — I don’t know why he did it, but I’m glad that — we call him Angel — I’m glad that Angel showed up because I don’t know what would have happened,” Angela told NBC2 News.
For a small town with a population of 46,452, animal control officers were kept busy Monday afternoon. Jones says they department also responded to a report about a boa constrictor in a church parking lot. The snake found its way into a car engine and was able to be removed without being harmed. It took three people to move the massive, seemingly random placed snake.
“It’s funny, because we aren’t a big place,” he said of the Gulf Coast town. “And we can go for four or five months without the media contacting us about a story. It’s been a busy week.”
Officers from the responding county sheriff’s office canvased the area and were unable to locate the suspect described as being in his 20s, tall and dark haired.
Posted by Patty Ann at 1:23 PM
Thursday, February 3, 2011
I found this sweet video about an orphan newborn buck. This video has a happy ending. Stories like this give me hope that maybe our species is evolving and maybe there are enough of us 'Tree-huggers' around to save our beautiful planet. I found it particularly hopeful and encouraging that there were a chain of people who came to the rescue of this newborn. First the people who saw his mother's death and witnessed his birth and then taking him to a wonderful couple who cared for him and documented his first 24 hours and then finally the woman who is going to raise this newborn. I want to share this very encouraging story of 'hope' with my blogger friends.
Posted by Patty Ann at 10:52 AM