Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Org. Inc. (Non-Profit)

H$U$ - Humane $ociety of the United $tates Alleged Criminal Behavior? Intimidation "TRUTH or FRICTION!"

 

 

NationalDogPress ©

	Debating the "Truth or Friction" of the Humane Society of the United States
"Once in the racket you're always in it." Al Capone Make sure you have your seat belts on and lets proceed. In this NationalDogPress © Magazine Issue on the HSUS ·  The MOB, H$U$ and the Black EGG ·  THE MOB ·  ENTER H$U$ ·  BEST FRIENDS - KNUCKLING UNDER TO H$U$ TAKE OVER? ·  H$U$ - Humane $ociety of the United $tates ·  THE BLACK EGG ·  California State Legislature Votes To Pay H$U$ Protection Money ·  EDITOR'S NOTE. . . ·  Disclaimer ·  Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 The MOB, H$U$ and the Black EGG THE MOB Scarface Capone would have been proud of the Mafia's advance into mainstream America and world markets. Organized crime in the last 80 years has become highly educated and extremely sophisticated. Children of the Mafiosi had the money to attend Princeton, Harvard, Columbia and Yale to obtain the best educations in Environmental and Political Science, Law, Business and Non Profit Law. It is common knowledge that the Feds could not take down Capone in any other way but through the Internal Revenue Service. What would be a dream come true for the mob and its rackets would be a business that one could launder money through, lots of money, far beyond what the old Italian restaurant money laundering racket served up. What better "racket" than Non Profit organizations, layered and affiliated for money laundering ease, and best of all, EXEMPT from taxes.  While at college, these next generation soon-to-be professionals with credentials and degrees often become involved in Environmentalism courtesy of ultra left professors such as Peter Singer. Singer is the master of indoctrination and manipulation of these young students that come to study at Harvard and Princeton. He is well known as the "Father of the Animal Rights Movement" which he admits was an experiment with a political social movement class. He admittedly cares nothing for animals, or for that matter, humans as one can ascertain from many of his statements such as "killing a newborn baby is never equivalent to killing a person, that is, a being who wants to go on living."[29] Obama recently appointed him as advisor to Cass Sunstein, the Harvard law professor, who is Obama's nominee to head the White House Office of Information and Regulatory affairs - the so-called "regulation czar". Singer advocates the moral equality of humans and animals.  When Singer's appointment to Princeton's faculty was announced in 1998, billionaire alumnus and presidential candidate Steve Forbes pledged not to give a dime to the school until he left the faculty. Nonetheless, Singer is still advising students and teaching "Practical Ethics," one of the most popular courses at the university. How did Singer, an atheist, become the God of Ethics? Isn't this the same attitude that Hitler possessed? Many that have studied Singer believe he emulates Hitler and has had a perverse fixation on the Fuhrer since early childhood. How Singer can then twist the atrocities of the Nazis into an argument for bioethics is mind-boggling considering that Hitler and the Nazi Party used animal rights propaganda and veganism to turn neighbor against neighbor and to vilify the Jewish people and their traditions and culture.  Dr. Martin Hulsey once a research scientist in the Department of Foods and Nutrition, University of Georgia, noted "In Nazi Germany, practices such as vivisection were characterized as Jewish (by relating them to the ritual of kosher slaughter) and thereby vilified. Subsequently, reverence for the "rights" of animals was used to justify the oppression of Jewish people." The laws and accusation of vivisection were often used as a pretext to prosecute Jewish scientists. [10] In 1940, a discussion was started within the administration about prohibiting pets, in order to conserve foodstuffs for human consumption. But personal interference by Hitler stopped this proposal. Ultimately a decree was published by the administration against pets, but it referred only to the pets in the possession of non-Aryan citizens.[23] On February 15, 1942, a decree was published prohibiting Jews from keeping pets,[20] which the Jews found humiliating.[23] writes Boria Sax in his book, Animals in the Third Reich: Pets, Scapegoats, and the Holocaust. Merritt Clifton from Animal People News notes that Sax details the 32 'animal protection laws' adopted by Nazi Germany in only 10 years, demonstrating that many and perhaps most were really just thinly disguised cover for oppression of Jews, gypsies, and other minorities. The first two banned kosher slaughter; the last one barred Jews from keeping pets."  Combine the animal rights movement and organized crime and the result is one of the biggest scams in American corporate history. The animal rights movement has taken over the animal welfare charities also referred to as non profit 501(c)3 corporations.  Non profits pay no taxes and are rarely audited. There is really no oversight set up for the non profits so it is easy to abuse what used to be public charity funds. Al Capone would be proud. Tax free money hires high dollar lobbyists to control Congress and state legislatures. The non profit corporations in turn write legislation that are voted into laws favorable for them. To get cooperation from politicians, campaign coffers overflow with millions in laundered mob money. The New Generation of Mafia Children have devised a way to get "protection" money and launder huge sums of dirty money on a corporate level. The big money lobbyists grease the wheels of politicians with the promise of huge campaign donations and fund- raising if their Bill is voted into law. Since there is a limit on campaign donations, they circumvent the law with 527 Political Organizations which are without limits. This is illegal, and in actuality, is another powerful arm of racketeering. ENTER H$U$   In 1992, the California State Attorney General revoked the Charter of the Humane $ociety of the United $tates for criminal behavior unbecoming a public charity. H$U$ would never be allowed to do business in the state of California again. This action followed a string of fraud, embezzlement, investigation by the SEC, and their well known ties to Underworld figures such as Antonio Giacalone. "Tony Jack", the infamous head of the Detroit mob is accused of ordering or being involved in the murders of JFK, RFK, MLK as well as Teamsters legend Jimmy Hoffa. Giacalone and his attorney, DeDay LaRene were convicted for conspiracy and tax evasion and went to prison in 1994. Mob attorney DeDay LaRene' was then paroled in 1995 to The Humane $ociety of the United $tates (H$U$). One has to wonder why a non profit public charity would want or need a brilliant mob attorney working for them? LaRene' lost his Bar license and privilege to practice law in Michigan, but has his license in Maryland. PHOTO: Doris Day - son Terry Melcher Wills was accused by Sandra LeBost of Royal Oak, Michigan that he never repaid a loan of $28,311 and her father's gold watch worth $10,000. Far from a coincidence, LaRene's wife, Joan Witt, and David Wills VP of the H$U$ were both on the Board of Directors of the Michigan Humane Society. Wills and others were accused of embezzlement when the non profit went under after trying to unionize the workers. Wills headed for NSAP, now dormant, for many years before taking the job at HSUS. Joan Witt, DeDay LaRene's wife, followed Wills from her humane society post in Nashua, New Hampshire to MHS, (Maryland Humane Society) where a similar story played out with embezzlement charges thrown at David Wills and the Board. They both then moved onto the HSUS.  David Wills and Wayne Pacelle once college roommates were friends while Pacelle was with the radical animal rights organization, Fund For Animals. Pacelle then went to work for the H$U$ with Wills in 1994. Soon both were accused of embezzling funds for their flamboyant Mexican wedding. Wills who was being groomed for the top post was charged with embezzlement and left H$U$ leaving a question as to the possibility of Pacelle rolling over on or even setting up Wills, in order to become the next president of H$U$. It is not unusual for the mob to often set up an executive to take the fall for a crime. Wills married the ex-wife of Alex Pacheco (who helped found PeTA along with Englishwoman, Ingrid Newkirk) and Pacelle married the secretary for Ark Trust, Kristen Rosenberg. Again, it is a mob tactic to marry for power or alliance strengthening so even a short term marriage in order to achieve his goals for H$U$ is not inconceivable. Perhaps it was a way to get H$U$'s foot in the door to do business in California since they were there. It was a known fact that the founder, Gretchen Wyler, had cancer. The plan worked and Ark Trust is now manned by Pacelle and was re-named North Hollywood Office of H$U$.  One of the most interesting of ever-mounting animal charities being taken over by H$U$ is the Doris Day Animal League. FBI Investigations of drug running/smuggling, and/or mob involvement haunt DDAL. The FBI drug investigation was kept quiet. This information came via a former FBI agent. It wasn't a big leap for DDAL to join organized crime infested H$U$. This merger pretty much says it all for non profits.  The most intriguing DDAL story is that Doris Day's son, Terry Melcher, who was CEO of DDAL, was not only involved with Charles Manson, the mob, H$U$, and illegal drugs but also with a Satanic cult called The Process of which Manson was also a member. The infamous and horrific Sharon Tate murders were committed in Terry Melcher's home by the Manson Family.  Melcher produced the Byrds, Paul Revere and the Raiders, David Cassidy and as well as the Beach Boys for Columbia Records. The Beach Boys (the Wilson brothers) introduced Melcher to Charlie Manson who was living with them at the time. Manson wanted Melcher to produce his music. Melcher never completed the project which was to include a film of Charlie Manson. Dennis Wilson, Manson's supporter, mysteriously drowned in the Marina del Rey December 28th, 1983.  Terry Melcher and his girlfriend, Candice Bergen, were living together at 10050 Cielo Drive in Los Angeles where sex and drug orgies were attended by the elite of Hollywood and the music industry. Melcher sub-let to Roman Polanski and Sharon Tate shortly after dropping Manson's project. When the Sharon Tate murders occurred some of the evidence included pornographic and sadistic movies taken of famous guests including Tate. Even John Lennon and George Harrison mentioned staying and doing drugs many times at Melcher's home. The drug connection seems to be the link between all parties with LSD "Orange Sunshine" being the common denominator especially linking the equally gruesome LaBianca murders that occurred days after the Tate murder. Two of the men murdered along with Tate are Jay Sebring, her ex- beau and Hollywood hairdresser who the movie "Shampoo" was supposedly written about and a Polish immigrant, Woytek Frykowski, both who were dealing drugs including "Orange Sunshine LSD". It was said that Rosemary LaBianca dealt this specific LSD manufactured in Malibu and Laguna Beach and that her husband Leno was deeply involved in the Las Vegas gambling syndicate. Leno was in debt to mobster Frankie Carpo, an associate of the infamous New York Don Frank Costello (that Jack Nicholson portrayed in the movie, The Departed), who Manson served as an apprentice to while doing time in the same prison. Manson had tried to obtain "the black book" that Leno had as well as shake him down for money and without finding the book, savagely killed Leno and his wife. With all the facts at hand, it appears Manson was a hit man.  After Manson was arrested, Melcher went into intense psychiatric treatment. Melcher was the only witness that was visibly shaking at Manson's trial. Was it from his involvement or fear of Manson? Doris Day and her son left a wake of murders and suicides following them. Two of Day's three husbands mysteriously committed suicide. These suicides were not investigated. One of them was Melcher's adoptive dad (Terry's biological father was Al Jordan, Day's 1st marriage) who was accused by Day of embezzling her entire $20 Million dollar fortune. Doris Day was not the virginal all American girl that the studios portrayed, but that's another story in itself. The details of how H$U$ "inherited" the Doris Day Animal League from Terry Melcher who died prematurely from melanoma are murky but suffice it to say, Pacelle was now in control of the biggest name animal organizations in California and the nation.  BEST FRIENDS - KNUCKLING UNDER TO H$U$ TAKE OVER ?   The founding members of The Process, a satanic worship cult "church" were basically struggling to survive, unable to get sufficient donations to keep their church running upon immigrating from England to the United States. At this time they were in Arizona. The Process had tried Santa Cruz, Los Angeles and San Francisco where they picked up Manson and his followers. Sacrifices of skinned and blood drained dogs followed their every move. This pattern of complaints followed the Process Cult as it moved across the nation.  There are links to Son of Sam murders and sex/snuff films as well with murders of filmographers and others that trail the several chapters of the Process across the nation. The founders of the Process Church attended an animal charity fund-raiser in Washington DC and were astounded at how people were throwing money at this 501(c)3 charity. That's when the founding members of The Process realized that it was easier to raise money for animals than for Satan. The founding members returned to Arizona and switched gears. Their organization was re-named BEST FRIENDS, and they moved to Kanab, Utah.  It seems the "wake" of death and destruction not only follows DDAL but also H$U$ whenever there is about to be the take-over of another "Associate Organization", as Wayne Pacelle calls it. A founder of Best Friends died in an unexplained car accident on his way back to the Best Friends Sanctuary. Best Friends admits that they were The Process Cult Church that sacrificed pets, but it's a little different when they themselves are up for sacrifice. The Founding Members never counted on they themselves being murdered if they objected to take- over or "changing of the guard" as was stated to this writer in 2008 before "The Recent Accident" by one of the original founding members. Who knew Ernst Paul Eckhoff, 72, of Kanab would be dead in a few months in a mysterious single car (?) roll-over accident!  PHOTO: Charlie Manson 1969 said to be a member of Process Church It is rumored that a rendering plant was built nearby the Best Friends "Sanctuary" to dispose of the animals. It certainly could help keep things tidy after a bloody sacrifice.  For those that are inclined to dismiss The Process' involvement in these crimes, consider the fact that the night before Robert F. Kennedy was killed, RFK accompanied Sharon Tate and Roman Polanski to a dinner party at the Malibu home of John Frankenheimer, the Director of the movie, The Manchurian Candidate. After the party, Frankenheimer then drove Kennedy back to the Ambassador Hotel. His assassin, Sirhan Sirhan, had visited a member of The Process that worked in the kitchen at the Ambassador Hotel the day before where Kennedy was gunned down. Kennedy was the most courageous and committed Attorney General this nation has ever had when it came to fighting organized crime.  H$U$ - Humane $ociety of the United $tates A little known fact is that Wayne Pacelle's brother, Richard Jr, is a professor at Georgia Southern University and teaches Non Profit Law. Could it be that he is the brains behind his brother's strategy and criminal career at H$U$ by using the law to circumvent the existing law. Richard Pacelle's specialty is teaching Non Profit Law. Wife Fenton Strickland is the head of the research collection in Political Science at Indiana University  Pictured right are wife Fenton Strickland, Mom Pat Pacelle, Richard Pacelle Jr "The Pacelle Family name is spelled Pacelli"  "Pacelle appears to have been Pacelli when the family arrived in the United States.."  "My life is pretty much like a cross between "My Big Fat Greek Wedding" and "The Soprano's"." The quotes above are from Richard Pacelle, Jr.'s website. Richard equates his family to the "Sopranos"? When a reporter mispronounced Wayne's name, ballistic comes to mind regarding Wayne's reaction. Why? Could it be the ties to the organized crime underworld? Upon reviewing Wayne Pacelli's Family Tree one finds some very interesting characters not only from the "Old Country Italy" but from Al Capone's infamous St. Valentine's Day Massacre. The man credited with the planning and orchestration of the St Valentine's Massacre was William Pacelli, right hand man for Capone. William Pacelli was also elected three times as Chicago representative for the state of Illinois. Was this Uncle Bill from the St. Valentine's Massacre credited with planning the gruesome crime that shocked America? Other well known Mob names are laced throughout the Wayne Pacelli Family Tree also. Maselli sometimes spelled Masselli, like those in the New Jersey and Rhode Island Crime Families pops up often. In an article in Time Magazine, William Masselli is described by the FBI as a "self-admitted soldier" in the Genovese Mafia family. The Pacelle brothers are not to be underestimated for their criminal genius. Wayne not only sits on the Board of many non-profits but he and his other H$U$ Board members and longtime "associates" also own or sit on the Boards of many of the for profit corporations. The for profit corporations service H$U$ such as the marketing mail houses that receive millions each year from H$U$ to solicit via the US Postal Service for donations. as well as lockbox corporations that receive the actual donations (envelope openers). These donations are then used to pay these service companies and salaries of H$U$ personnel with only 4% of the total income for H$U$ going to help animals in any direct way. Before Pacelle took the helm of H$U$, the reported income was nearly $2 million dollars annually. Now they report over $100 million in income per year. What charity has ever made this kind of a leap in history? H$U$ paid over $881,000 to Exciting New Technologies, owned by the main internet support service for on-line pornography and internet gambling. Ex H$U$ president Dr. Irwin's son, Chris, was hired as Director of Business Development by the owner of ENT, Gordon, a mail and bank fraud felon. Dr. Irwin moved to the position of CEO of the American Bible Society, where $5 million went to ENT within two years time. Once the pornographic background was revealed, Irwin was dismissed from his post by a very embarrassed American Bible Society. THE BLACK EGG   Singer writes in his paper, Heavy Petting,"Some men use hens as a sexual object, inserting their penis into the cloaca, an all-purpose channel for wastes and for the passage of the egg. This is usually fatal to the hen, and in some cases she will be deliberately decapitated just before ejaculation in order to intensify the convulsions of its sphincter."This is cruelty, clear and simple. (But is it worse for the hen than living for a year or more crowded with four or five other hens in barren wire cage so small that they can never stretch their wings, and then being stuffed into crates to be taken to the slaughterhouse, strung upside down on a conveyor belt and killed? If not, then it is no worse than what egg producers do to their hens all the time.)" Photo: Peter Singer - by Joel Travis Sage Pacelle showed up uninvited and unannounced, at a Pacific North West Egg Producer Convention prior to the filing of the California initiative later to be called "Prop 2". Wayne Pacelle made them an offer, off the record, which in this case they refused. The use of classic mob tactics which encompasses fear, threat, intimidation and extortion (racketeering) are exactly what was employed against the egg producers by refusing to "play ball" with Pacelle. H$U$ promptly financed the Initiative for "hen welfare" in California. The implementation of Prop 2, , will put egg producers out of business and devastate the agricultural industry in California. Beef, pork and dairy producers will soon join the egg producers' exodus from California. This is reminiscent of the space industry's exodus and the "depression" that followed in California. Next, Neil Trent animal rights extremist and CEO of HSI (Humane $ociety International) was placed as Director of the Marin Humane $ociety just before Prop 2. Neil Trent's timely appearance pushed out a very competent shelter director who had run the Marin Humane Society for 20 years. Soon Neil Trent now as Director of The Marin Humane Society was speaking in support for Prop 2. Why would he leave a position at the top of H$I to run a small time local humane society.  Was Neil Trent "placed" in this liberal wealthy California locale in order to garner support and financing for Prop 2? Neil Trent abruptly left the Marin Humane Society shortly after Prop 2 was passed.  Another strategic placement happened at the prestigious San Francisco SPCA. It's new Director from Colorado, a hotbed for punitive animal legislation, Jan McHugh-Smith played hostess to the Prop 2 rallies held by Wayne Pacelle himself. Wayne Pacelle and Neil Trent (Pacelle's Capo) were side by side at the rally in Marin County. Pacelle said in the moment of excitement after three hours of mind- control dribble, "Are you inspired by your Co- Religionists? " Pacelle and Neil Trent were leading an apparent revival meeting soliciting members for Pacelle's "1000 Club". Planted "ringers" in the audience much like at corrupt auction house would jump up and shout "I'll get a thousand signatures". This club is for those who obtained 1000 plus signatures to get the Prop 2 initiative on the ballot in California to overthrow free enterprise for farmers and ranchers. Wayne said over and over in a monotone hypnotic voice, "hens in barren wire cages so small that they can never stretch their wings, or turn around" for three hours.  Prop 2 passed by uninformed voters in CA not realizing that the price of eggs would double before Prop 2 was in place and may very well quadruple the price of eggs before January 1, 2015. But that was only phase one. The most important piece of the puzzle for control of the food production of California was yet to drop. AB 1437, the Shelled EGG Bill, was sponsored by Jared Huffman, a first-time Democrat Assembly member from Mill Valley (Marin County) during the present legislative session (2009). There are no egg growers in Mill Valley nor Marin County. Why is Huffman sponsoring this Bill? Huffman claims it is for "hen welfare". Seemingly, legislators have forgotten about the welfare of their constituency, the consumer. There is no other food product that is used more than eggs. The reasons it affects the price of food more than any other animal food product is because there are eggs in almost all processed foods, such as baked goods, crackers, cookies, pancake mix, and in frozen prepared foods as emulsifiers and stabilizers as well as to boost the nutritional content of foods.  After an examination of campaign donations to the Prop 2 campaign organization, Californians For Humane Farms by the Fair Political Practices Commission, it was advised that the donations represented RICO activity and should be investigated by the Attorney General's Office.  H$U$ has found a way to bypass the campaign donation limitations by laundering the money through employees of H$U$and it's "Associate Member Organizations". H$U$'s 501(c)3 non profit "loaned" $500,000 to DDAL a 501(c)4 organization, (whom they own) to lobby Prop 2 in California which goes into effect in 2015. The 501(c)3 organizations are forbidden to "loan" or "give" money to 527 organizations by the IRS and under the Fair Political Practices Act. This has been reported repeatedly but is ignored not only by the IRS but by the Attorney General of the State of California. When a Senator's staff was asked why no investigation was ongoing, the response was "Jerry Brown is running for Governor. He won't be making waves."  However, Jerry Brown, a dyed in the wool Democrat, also looked the other way during the Katrina disaster, when a multitude of complaints were levied against H$U$ for misappropriating the $35 million in direct donations intended for hurricane victims. Yet, Brown did prosecute a smaller charity, Noah's Wish, that received $8 million in Katrina donations which were seized by Brown. What is also missing are the pets supposedly "rescued." What the above persons and organizations will eventually find out is that they were set up and used by Pacelle at H$U$ to commit crimes for him and the furtherance of organized crime and his future "political" career. The end result will be a black market that drives the price of eggs through the roof, loss of jobs, businesses and tax revenues for the state at a time when California is teetering at the precipice of bankruptcy. Prop 2 enables H$U$ to not only inspect but raid anyone involved in animal production agriculture in California. If H$U$ finds animal cruelty, the H$U$ is allowed to seize, keep, sell anything they steal from California's farmers as well as heavily fine farmers and send farmers to prison. H$U$ wants to do away with the California Department of Agriculture and take their place. For this end, Pacelle is pulling the strings of the 2nd most powerful Senator in the State Legislature, Dean Florez. California's Dept. of Agriculture is probably the only agency running in the black in California. This is the conduit for "protection money" to flow to H$U$. What better way for organized crime to operate than through a non profit within the state structure. It would never be audited by the IRS. The perks are, the H$U$ appointed criminals, many of whom are felons, can legally carry guns and shoot anyone they'd like to remove. They can steal, keep, sell and profit from all the farmers they want to put out of business. What are California Legislators thinking putting VEGANS armed with weapons in charge of MEAT and EGG GROWERS?  The California legislators are NOT thinking. They are being bribed. A bribe is not just money, it is anything that is promised or accepted in order to obtain a vote on a Bill or Law that the briber can profit from and the legislator receives some advantage which can be sex, a sweater (as in US v Frega of San Diego) the promise of a Campaign Donation. It is also Racketeering. Former Judge Adams is still in Lompoc Federal Prison, just ask him. It's not just H$U$ that is bribing and running a racketeering scheme and artifice, they are dragging other non profits into their bloody corrupt pit. H$U$ donated $10,000 to Judi Mancuso's 501(c)3 group called $ocial Compassion that has been leading the attack against pet owners to fine and seize any and all pets not sterilized. Again, shadows of the Nazi horrors. Judi Mancuso then turned around and gave the entire $10,000 to Senator Majority Leader Darrell Steinberg's 527 campaign organization. It is illegal for Social Compassion to donate money to a 527. Now, Mancuso and other organizations are staging to wage a war on farmers with groups like Animal Cruelty Investigators, a rogue SPCA whose main board member, the husband of longtime PeTA employee, Jane Garrison, is partners with Mancuso's husband, Rolf Wicklund, a cousin of the notorious ALF spokesperson and admitted operative, Freeman Wicklund. Freeman Wicklund also headed the radical organization, COKS, and then not so coincidentally, Mercy For Animals, that set up a Fresno chicken farmer for a faked undercover expose on chicken abuse during the Prop 2 campaign.  California State Legislature Votes To Pay H$U$ Protection Money If by now, you are wondering how is it conceivably legal to seize a citizen's property under such quasi guidelines as a chicken being able to stretch their wings, the answer is corruption within the legislature.  Pictured right is Louis Caldera  Since 1993 citizens in the state of California have begged the Attorney General, the local District Attorneys and Law Enforcement to investigate the illegal issuance of search and seizure warrants by Superior Court Judges to private, non profit 501(c)3 corporations.  These warrants are issued to SPCA and Humane Societies to do Home Invasion Robberies and file false fabricated criminal charges against property owners to, bottom line, be awarded large "restitution orders" from the Judge. The Judge automatically signs a criminal Abstract of Judgment for from $250,000 to $850,000. This then enables the Non Profit Private Corporation to lien and force sale or seize the home or property. The California Constitution Article 2, Section 12 specifically states that "The Legislature Shall Not Give Any Power To A Private Person or Private Corporation".  The State of California Legislature violated the California Constitution in 1995 with 607f of the Civil Code. When caught, Assemblymember Louis Caldera had it repealed in 1996. * Seems scandal follows the former California Assemblymember. Caldera was appointed by President Obama as Director of the Military January 9, 2009. He resigned May 22 after accepting responsibility as the scapegoat for the Air Force One fly over scandal in New York that left many New Yorkers in a state of terror and panic.  In 1997, the president, of spca/LA, Madeline Bernstein, became outraged with Caldera and wrote a scathing but self-incriminating letter* to Caldera admitting that "she had even written the Humane Officer Bill and did everything Bernstein and Caldera had agreed on in order for Caldera to put this law in place." (Employees and volunteers for 501(c)3's are not to be involved in the political process at all or they lose their non profit status, as per IRS code) Bernstein represented about 30 other non profit SPCA/Humane Societies that would benefit from this law allowing them to be able to seize property and homes for their profit to make their non profits wealthy. This also made them eligible to collect monthly from city and county government and the State Mandate Fund which would give them up to one million dollars for convicting or getting "plea bargains" from persons charged with animal cruelty. This would allow for six digit salaries for the executives of these non profits such as Bernstein who is paid over $200,000 to seize and kill thousands of loved pets a year taken from loving homes under fraudulent cruelty charges. (See D & D Disposal annual report) In February 1997, Bernstein went to work finding a new "termed out" old Senator that didn't care about what he was doing to his constituents or the rest of California. Bernstein found the perfect patsy, Senator Ayala. Ayala already had SB 633, The Water Bill, a 100 page monster, on the floor that he sponsored. Bernstein was in hot pursuit of Ayala to ramrod her "Humane Officer Bill"* through the Senate hidden on the last few pages of his Water Bill. California Constitution Article 4, Section 9 prohibits sneaking attachments onto Bills that are not the same subject matter in the title and content into bills that are already presented to the House or Senate. Anything added "shall" be the same as the Title of the Bill. The Water Bill,* as it is titled, addresses water companies and their corporate responsibilities. Article 4, Section 9* specifically states that ANY Bill or subject matter that is added to an existing Bill and passed into law is VOID and shall not be enforced. CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION ARTICLE 4,SEC. 9  A statute shall embrace but one subject, which shall beexpressed in its title. If a statute embraces a subject not expressed in its title, only the part not expressed is VOID.  Bernstein and Ayala managed to not only SNEAK the Humane Officer Bill attachment into SB 633, but they got it passed and placed into the Corporate Code 14500 through 14503 and into effect in October 1997.  Corporate Codes 14500 through 14503 are Constitutionally Void in the state of California. The Attorney Generals including Jerry Brown, have ignored all complaints and pleas from the citizens of the State of California to investigate theSPCA/Humane Society's illegal Home Invasion Robberies, beatings of senior citizens, carrying and use of spca/LA's automatic weapons.  In late 2008 a disabled LAPD officer's mother died of a stroke from one of Bernstein's Home Invasion Robberies after being terrorized by Madeline Bernstein and Los Angeles Assistant City Attorney Donald Cocek. This is not just murder, it is pre-meditated murder. How many more "deaths of senior citizens" is it going to take for the state of California legislature and the Attorney General's Office to wake up? January 10th, 2007 Madeline Bernstein and her thugs, Steven Pacheco and Derek Hensel from Pasadena Humane Society, Tony Manzanares and 11 others, beat a 57 year old woman to the floor of her home, bashed her head against a bookcase for at least two minutes over and over, Pacheco shoved a 9mm between her eyes, as Hensel pointed an automatic weapon with a grenade launcher at her. Manzanares threatened to tazer her, then knocked her to the floor . Manzanares and Hensel grabbed her by the breasts and arms and dragged her out of her home. Another man, David Havard, grabbed her by the breasts and held her that way against a retaining wall outside for over a half hour sexually touching her.  Madeline Berstein directs her thugs and is responsible for these actions. She is a licensed attorney in NY and CA and according to law "knew or should have known" she was committing the following felonies against the State of CA as well as all of her victims in Home Invasion Robberies by violating the following: CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION ARTICLE 4, SEC. 15  A person who seeks to influence the vote or action of a member of the Legislature in the member's legislative capacity by bribery, promise of reward, intimidation, or other dishonest means, or a member of the Legislature so influenced, is guilty of a felony."  We obtained copies of her letters to Caldera. One cannot imagine why the Dept of Justice is not investigating these travesties.  Al "Scarface" Capone would be proud. The Mob, H$U$ and the Black Egg Copyright 8/17/2009 EDITOR'S NOTE. . . This special note is to Roger Kindler, legal counsel for H$U$.  At one time you sent me what is basically called a "cease and desist" from publishing factual information regarding the criminality of H$U$. You sent it certified and registered via the U.S. mail. It took you three (3) pages of type, I still have the copy. I replied in kind with 3 sentences. Basically I told you to pack your brief case's if you plan on suing me. How do you like me now? Sincerely,  Fred Crane  Editor  Game Fowl News Disclaimer This site (NationalDogPress) does not advocate or endorse any activities that are in violation of Federal, State, or Local laws. Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 In compliance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, GFN is distributed free, without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. All logos and trademarks in this site (NationalDogPress) are property of their respective owner. NATIONAL DOG PRESS - FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. NEWS SOURCE: email: gfn@nethere.com phone: 202-506-9008 web: http://www.gamefowlnews.com

###

Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization Incorporated (Non-Profit)

"The truth is rarely pure and never simple."


PLEASE DONATE to Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization Incorporated (Non-Profit) BY CLICKING ON THE PAYPAL LINK BELOW: 

https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=6721925

Fair Use Notice: Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
 
Legal Disclaimer: The information, articles, or links (posted, embedded or otherwise) to the above postings are provided to give readers more information on general dog-related or associated subjects and are not intended as legal advice. All individuals are urged to contact licensed attorneys in their states regarding specific legal issues.
 
Copyright © 2006-2010,  Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization Incorporated (Non-Profit) Iowa 2009, NationalDogPress News, All Rights Reserved

Humane Society of the United States claim they are training law enforcement

 

Humane Society of the United States claim they are training law enforcement

Does anyone know anything about these HSUS animal rights agenda training camps? 

20 Dec 09

By Dean A. Ayers

Lead Investigative Reporter

NationalDogPress ©

 

QUESTION: Does anyone know anything about these HSUS animal rights agenda cop training camps? No one is publicly preaching or teaching about this agenda.  The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) proudly claims they “are” training law enforcement to shut down animal breeders.

 

ANSWER: HSUS has documented law enforcement animal rights agenda accomplishments in 2008: Here are the HSUS quotes on these training camp accomplishments as follows;

 

• The newly established Humane Society Legislative Fund began lobbying on Capitol Hill to secure legislation, support animal friendly Congressional candidates for office, and educate the public.

• We also helped prosecutors win the conviction of scores of animal abusers and animal fighters — assisting with cases involving dog fighting, hoarding, farm animal abuse, and puppy mills. We created a new HSUS Animal Protection Litigation (APL) SWAT team consisting of 12 full-time attorneys and recruited hundreds of pro bono lawyers. 
  
  
• More than 57,700 law enforcement officers, educators, shelter professionals, emergency services personnel and veterinarians attended HSUS training and education classes.

 

The only cure for “puppy mill” legislation proposal propaganda is a large dose of the truth.

HSUS has previously claimed Pennsylvania was the “puppy mill” capitol of the USA. Now it seems that Ohio is the puppy mill capitol. Or is it Arizona? Or Colorado? Or Iowa? Or Illinois? As a result of these unfounded “puppy mill” capitol claims, legislators are clamoring to erase any stigma of being potentially labeled the “puppy mill” capitol of the USA, affecting their state’s good name. But they cannot all be the "puppy mill" capitol can they?

The key to resolving this problem and question, like so many issues, is education. Legislators want to do the right thing. They rely on constituents to tell them what problems are occurring in their districts. In the absence of good information, a slick propaganda campaign like the HSUS puppy mill effort can really take hold in many states, especially when the HSUS admittedly are sending law enforcement to their “animal rights” education training camps for alleged re-education on the animal rights side of the agenda. And what is even scarier, is that various law enforcements agencies are allegedly accepting these “training camp” education invitations to be allegedly re-educated on animal issues.

What is clear is that numerous legislators “wanting to do the right thing” for their state’s citizens in these alleged or suspected “puppy mill” states.  The legislators allegedly disclose they are not aware that they are being deceived by the animal rights groups.

In press releases by the state legislators authoring the various puppy mill bills, many express shock at discovering that their state is the "puppy mill" capitol of the U.S. 

But they cannot all be the “puppy mill” capitols can they, as animal rights activists want you to believe in their aggressive “puppy mill” reaching campaigns in many states. Just like one such aggressive "puppy mill" disclosure agenda in Iowa, by Mary LaHay, allegedly campaigning in the state of Iowa for her IowaVCA agenda.

 

So who is Rights or Wrong on “puppy mill” state's statistics?

We the People, who love, care, control, and observe our dogs, and other owner’s dogs  (or dog kennel businesses) daily, must ask our ourselves, and then ask our representatives and senators to verify the claims of kennel abuses before believing that their state is a haven for abusive “puppy mill” kennels. 

Pro sportsmen in each state must ask their legislators to make sure that these “puppy mill” proposal bills do not impact small kennels that may sell only a few dogs in a proper and legitimate love, and caring, home, and animal welfare environment, as they primarily exist for hunting, field trials, hobbies, etc. 

Elected officials must be told by We the People, that we are not the source of pet store dog purchases. There by preventing confusion in your comments and legislative proposal requests sent to your legislators, who are now treating private dog kennels the same as large scaled commercial “puppy mill” entities.

These USDA and large scale dog kennels allegedly containing hundreds or thousands of poor helpless and defenseless dogs, being “factory farmed” in relentless abusive breeding techniques and conditions, that will ultimately result in the elimination of the small scale legitimate home breeders and the sporting dog kennels who actually do care about the love for dog(s), and the proper and responssible animal welfare of their dogs and puppies.

When the people in each state contact their senators and representatives, they are not always told this “truthful” information I describe in this article. Rather generalizations and a stereotype of "puppy mills" is instead portrayed to the legislators. This is very damaging to responsible small scale dog breeders and to private property dog owners at best. It is just plain evil at worst.

Most legislators must also contend with behind the scenes issues, like the alleged dog kennel or animal rights lobbying in attempting to curb the legislators on the animal rights or animal welfare issues, depending on which side you campaign for.

In reaction the legislators want to make sure they (the legislators) are not over-reaching in new animal laws or they take the "extreme" measure and pass "anything goes" in good or bad animal laws for dog and animal owners, let alone dog breeders. 

Many legislators have been open to animal legislation changes protecting smaller private property pets, small scale sporting dogs or small independent family controlled dog kennels. You just don't know how the legislators are going to react.

The burden is on us to make sure they know the truth. Additionally, it is important the We the People communicate our concerns also to our local animal shelter, animal rescues, and animal control authorities, as to the “truth” in our information, as it is obvious now, that the HSUS, has a proactive agenda to radically influence all law enforcement authorities in their animal rights activists agendas.

The Bottom Line all Animal issues are: 

"The truth is rarely pure and never simple."

Source:  http://www.hsus.org/about_us/accomplishments/

 

Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization Incorporated (Non-Profit)

"The truth is rarely pure and never simple."


PLEASE DONATE to Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization Incorporated (Non-Profit) BY CLICKING ON THE PAYPAL LINK BELOW:

https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=6721925

Fair Use Notice: Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
 
Legal Disclaimer: The information, articles, or links (posted, embedded or otherwise) to the above postings are provided to give readers more information on general dog-related or associated subjects and are not intended as legal advice. All individuals are urged to contact licensed attorneys in their states regarding specific legal issues.
 
Copyright © 2006-2010,  Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization Incorporated (Non-Profit) Iowa 2009, NationalDogPress News, All Rights Reserved

Article also published on www.CanadaFreePress.com under "PETS" Category.

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/18156

The Dark Side of 'Foreign Puppy Mills' Contribute to Iowa “Puppy Mill” Propaganda Accusations

 

The Dark Side of 'Foreign Puppy Mills' Contribute to Iowa “Puppy Mill” Propaganda Accusations

Animal Rights organizations have used photographs and video footage of alleged inhumane conditions for years to help spread their propaganda “puppy mill” message and persuade the general public and political parties on issues related to legislative animal law ”perversion” to be enacted.

 

By Dean A. Ayers

Lead Investigative Reporter

NationalDogPress ©

13 Dec 09

 

The Rise of Ecoterrorism in Animal Rights “Puppy Mill” Bull in Iowa and elsewhere!

Animal Rights organizations have used photographs and video footage of alleged inhumane conditions for years to help spread their propaganda “puppy mill” message and persuade the general public and political parties on issues related to legislative animal law ”perversion” on exaggerated or misleading issues about animal welfare involving responsible dog owners, breeders, and dog kennels that breed dogs in a professional manner and in an eco-environment.

More recently, “Puppy Mill” propaganda groups have allegedly been using footage to assist in bringing charges against owners of dog kennels in many states where the footage was shot, in a manner reminiscent of a daytime ”soap opera” where truth and fiction is never distinguished by facts, rather only by alleged video emotional “set ups” in video and photography techniques or tricks of photography by animal rights activist groups and sympathizers.

This alleged photographic evidence is often obtained when animal rights activists or animal rescue activists either trespass on the private property premises or gain entrance under false pretenses, like gaining employment without disclosing affiliations with animal rights groups or seeking employment in a dog kennel in order to exaggerate the truth on health issues.

When these cases come to trial, they often implicate other legal issues, such as the admissibility of photographs in trials and fourth amendment search and seizure rights that are many times violated by the animal rights activists in order to gain illegal, illicit, or immoral access to their “intended kennel targets.” These “puppy mill” seeking activists also raise questions in alleged lies and propaganda about why dogs and other animals are not better protected by the inspections included in most USDA or state agricultural regulation laws (or lack of laws).

Currently in Iowa, a “battle” is brewing between legitimate and responsible dog kennel owners and dog breeders against animal rights activists such as one, Mary LaHay, from Des Moines, Iowa, who allegedly claims to now be an “expert” in “puppy mill” activities in the state of Iowa, just because 2 years ago she was allegedly not happy with a puppy she apparently picked and purchased from an unknown dog kennel. And the Insanity of this “dog and pony” puppy mill propaganda is that Iowa legislators, and sympathetic Veterinarians, and Animal Rescue groups (who sell dogs for profit, under the name rescue or adoption scheme) are supporting this animal “puppy mill” activist. In reality, the screaming of Iowa is a puppy mill state, is allegedly way past time in her credibility of her alleged facts on the issue at hand; for now, the responsible 440 legitimate dog kennel owners in Iowa need to ”circle the wagons” and “fire back” at all this animal rights “puppy mill” propaganda BULL being dished out as fact! It is insanity in society, to allow alleged “spoon fed” animal rights propaganda to be put forth to the people of Iowa, without the other side’s facts being heard. This is what this article is about. It’s not about LaHay, it’s about “puppy mill” facts, effecting Iowa dog owners with “perverted” animal laws and legislation proposals.

 

The Dark Side of 'Foreign Puppy Mills'

Animal welfare workers hold two foreign puppy mill survivors that were sold at auction recently in Los Angeles: a miniature Yorkshire terrier and a miniature Maltese.

Debbie Garringer of Claremont, Calif., holds one of the two dogs she won at the auction. Garringer paid $2,000 for this miniature Maltese.

Hundreds of people turned out to bid on 10 purebred puppies at L.A.'s East Valley Animal Shelter. The auction raised more than $20,000 in money that will go to the city's animal shelters.

Purebred dogs go for top dollar in pet stores around the country, but buyers of cute, cuddly puppies may not know that some come from unregulated breeding mills overseas. So-called puppy-mill dogs are showing up sick and dehydrated at major airports around the country.

In Los Angeles, one recent shipment of dead and ailing puppies from South Korea got the city's attention. Twenty of the dogs in the shipment seized at Los Angeles International Airport either had died or had to be euthanized after the trip. The 10 survivors were turned over to the city's shelter.

Five months later, those survivors, of five miniature Maltese and five tiny Yorkshire terriers were ready for adoption. Hundreds of animal lovers, many wrapped in blankets to keep warm, lined up on a chilly morning in front of L.A.'s East Valley Animal Shelter for a chance to bid on the dogs.

Ed Boks, the general manager of L.A. Animal Services, was thrilled at the turnout. City law requires him to hold an auction when more than one person wants an animal.

"I want to begin with a few facts that you won't commonly hear from your local pet store with respect to where animals, puppies just like this, can often times go for $3,500 or more," he told the crowd.

Boks said the 10 minipurebreds arrived with forged health certificates. The documents put their ages at 5 months, but they were actually only 5 weeks old.

"These puppies are the product of a cruel, factory-style dog breeding operation that produces animals with chronic health problems, temperament issues and hereditary defects, so our message to all of you this morning is buyer beware," he warned.

Overseas Puppy Mills Proliferate

Puppy mills began proliferating overseas about five years ago; at about the same time that U.S. authorities started cracking down on unscrupulous domestic breeders.

Tom Sharp of the American Kennel Club says that's when he started seeing bulldogs arriving from Russia and Yorkies from South Korea. With the help of the Internet, Sharp says, dishonest pet stores and breeders could easily get puppies overseas.

"That way, they don't have to be inspected by the different organizations and the governments here in the U.S., and avoid all the requirements," he says.

Right now, the only federal requirement an importer has to follow is to provide proof of a current rabies vaccine documentation that is easily forged.

Federal regulators say that rule was written at a time when the only dogs coming into the United States were companion pets. Nina Marano of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says Congress just passed a law banning the importation of dogs under 6 months old for resale.

But Marano says it will take at least two years for the ban to be enforced.

"We can try to regulate our way out of it, but another part is, I think, the issue about demand is that there needs to be a lot more public education about the demand that is being created for these puppies," she says.

A winning bid for shelter dogs

The demand was high for Los Angeles' puppy-mill survivors.

One winning bidder was Debbie Garringer. "I was really lucky, and I'm happy, so happy, and I will take care of it so much and it will have a beautiful home," she said.

All 10 of the purebred puppy-mill survivors got new homes, as did 52 other pets from the shelter. In all, Animal Services raised more than $20,000 and got its message out.

Side Note: Adoption is just another word of political correctness, for purchasing a dog from a shelter/rescue that IS a dog selling business. The adoption or rescue people need to drive the breeding and kennel owners “out of business” in order to corner the profiteering market in selling adopted or rescued dogs to the public. It’s all about the money trail in rescue and adoptions. Eliminate the competition thru animal laws.

Even the shelters are using the 'rescue' to make big money. So the emphasis on stopping 'puppy mills' needs to be put forth on the foreign sources of 'puppy mills' and the American airports where these foreign 'puppy mill' dogs are arriving. 

If you are going to purchase a dog, then seek out a locally well known dog breeder. But please don't shop for pets in stores.

The more I hear about Iowa’s Mary LaHay and her “Puppy Mill” Propaganda, the more I like dog breeders and the dog kennel owners.

This country was built by dog people who got dirty, but in a clean way. Dirty men and women with calloused hands and dingy overalls and women with dog food stains and baby puppy spit-up on them were responsible for this nation's Golden Age called Liberty and Freedom. Now the state of Iowa and many other states in this nation have to deal with “animal rights activists” like Mary LaHay, in Des Moines, Iowa with her “puppy mill” bull attempting to portray responsible and legitimate dog kennel owners as some starch-collared, manicured USDA “puppy mill” influenced dog and puppy commodities trader. Mary LaHay, in Iowa is courting with the Iowa legislators who have “no spine” to tell these animal rights activists to stifle their alleged “perverted” dog kennel inspection legislation requests. Animal rights(AR) activist groups "perverting" the natural God given laws, while these alleged Puppy Mill Screaming "perverts" sit at a computer all day and trade animal legislation ordinances, laws, regulations about  dogs, cats, pets, animals that may even include horses, cattle, sheep, goats, beans, gold, oil, timber and other things these "PERVERTED" law maker seekers and Animal Rights groups have no idea how to produce proper raised dogs, or any other animals.  Mary LaHay, in Des Moines, Iowa does not even produce  a single properly raised puppy from birth in a kennel or operate on a farm with animals or in any other loving pet owner homes, in a traditional and natural god given manner, independent of government intrusion or violation of the U.S. Constitution. Mary LaHay is allegedly just an “animal activist” screaming “puppy mill” all over the state of Iowa.

The best people I've ever known had hands that looked like well-worn leather with cracks and crevices that crisscrossed their palms with tributaries of topsoil with a bunch of loving pet dogs running beside them thru the fields, and towns where they live and own property, or have dog kennels or, in their homes, on their private property premises.

These legitimate dog kennel owners Iowa, and many other states as well, are traditional animal farmers and proper dog and puppy breeders, also called animal producers, pet lovers, and family people, who worked all day in the kennels, and fields or at their jobs and got so dirty when they came home at night they had to undress outside because they had a quarter-acre of soil in their boots from their land. Always insuring their dogs, pets, and animals were all taken properly care of in all things, before the owner went into their own home to even eat, sleep or rest. Dog Kennel owners, and Dog Breeders, LOVE THEIR DOGS, plain and simple. And they have the intelligence and ability to properly maintain numerous dogs on their own private property. Just because an owner has up to 150 dogs, has no bearing or fact that they are unable to properly maintain them. It’s the Animal Rights Activists” like Mary LaHay, that just “scream” puppy mill because, she allegedly was “unhappy” with HER CHOICE of a puppy from some unknown breeder.  

 If Mary LaHay, in Iowa, or any other Animal Rights Activist would like to “debate” the legitimacy of their alleged reasons and alleged validity of any “puppy mills” in Iowa, then this Lead Investigative Reporter who has owned and loved dogs all his life, living in Iowa, is more than willing to entertain her potential request to debate (on her tab).

The dirty boots and clothing of Animal Rights Activists

The alleged dirty boots and clothing of the HSUS, PETA, AR, or USDA premises inspectors or the "death squads" sent to kill or cull or seize all your pets and animals, while they continue to "track" the disease known as "DEATH" into the next premises of upcoming euthanized animal death. All in the name of an Animal's Right? TO what be murdered by a syringe, instead of what, a loving family environment? It's Perverted thinking at best, evil at worst, and all in the minds of sick, demented people known as potential terrorists to pets, owners, and life itself. There is no good solution except to RESIST perverted thinking and Take back Our Laws, to restore them to natural god given laws. Because killing healthy pet animals like blood-sport, or scorched earth policy of a Nuke strike, is NOT a solution either. You would think intelligent college educated people, mayors, councilmen/women, state governors, congressional members, and animal Vets, could use their "Brains" and still save lives, not "destroy" them.

###

C. Kahn was a contributor to this report as a source.

 
Dean A. Ayers is a prior United States Air Force Special Agent for the AFOSI. His duties included that of law enforcement specialist, criminal, fraud, and counter-intelligence. He was assigned to felony crimes in federal government, fraud, waste and abuse investigations of the military branches of service, and counter-intelligence in overseas locations. Dean was also a former Texas State Commissioned Alamo State Park Armed Ranger.

Dean is currently Director, Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization and Dean is also a Lead Investigative Reporter for the NationalDogPresss ©, and DogPress.org news press services. 

Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization Incorporated (Non-Profit)

"The truth is rarely pure and never simple."


PLEASE DONATE to Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization Incorporated (Non-Profit) BY CLICKING ON THE PAYPAL LINK BELOW:

https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=6721925

Fair Use Notice: Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
 
Legal Disclaimer: The information, articles, or links (posted, embedded or otherwise) to the above postings are provided to give readers more information on general dog-related or associated subjects and are not intended as legal advice. All individuals are urged to contact licensed attorneys in their states regarding specific legal issues. Information published regarding specific states, names, places, dates or events, is based upon research located  in the “public venue” of various media reporting entities on puppy mill issues regarding their known or reported public actions., These various and numerous media venues, and their reports about specific persons in this article hereby preclude any allegation of misrepresentation or allegation of misquoting any specific person based upon the “public venue” reports containing a person(s) specific name, location and summary of their actions or reported information. The specific information alleged in this article or “public venue” and reports are not to be confused with unfounded commentary allegations. It is by Investigative Reporting and research in the “public venues” by an incorporated nonprofit news organization that makes up this article and report of allegations or information. All our NationalDogPress rights reserved and under copyright. For legal purposes this article is documented as a “commentary.”

Copyright © 2006-2010,  Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization Incorporated (Non-Profit) Iowa 2009, NationalDogPress News, All Rights Reserved

It's a terrible scam – The Animal Rights "Humane Society"

  

It's a terrible scam – The Animal Rights "Humane Society"

Animal Rights agendas using terms like, "Humane Society," are devised to “Exaggerate” every aspect of animal care and control into propaganda, so that the truth cannot be told without a lie.

By Dean A. Ayers

Lead Investigative Reporter

NationalDogPress  ©

11 Dec 09

 

Animal Rights agendas using terms like, "Humane Society," are devised with the common people in mind, who don't care to dwell on what ‘really’ happens to dogs, cats, pets and animals or their pet owners who are the true “innocent victims” of animal rights tyranny laws forced on private property owners.

Using terms like, "Humane Society," are devised to “Exaggerate “ in every aspect of animal care and control propaganda, so that the truth cannot be told without a lie. This alleged agenda to destroy “innocent” animal owner victims who own dogs, pets and animals on private property is going to escalate in society, until dog and pet owners “stand their ground” and refuse to allow their dogs, pets and animals to be illegally, or immorally confiscated with “perverted” animal laws, by defensive “force” in necessary to uphold constitutional private property law and the “right” to defend one’s life, liberty, and property.

The true “innocent victims” of this animal rights tyranny, which is forced on animal owners on private property by the HSUS, and similar animal rights activist groups perpetrating a lie from their exaggerations of the truth about dog and pet owners must become the new “battle ground” for all dog, pet, and animal owners be it owning one dog or 150 dogs, pets, or animals. Failing to get involved in “standing your ground” against tyranny in animal laws “perverted” by these animal rights activists, means an end to all life “with” our dogs, pets, and animals in our families, as “extended” members of our family unit.

Dr. Michael W. Fox, DSc, PhD, BVet Med, MRCVS is a well-known veterinarian, former vice president of The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), former vice president of Humane Society International, and the author of more than 40 books on animal care and behavior, and bioethics, written allegedly according to the agendas of “Animal Rights.”

Dr. Fox is known as a sharp and eloquent critic of the biotechnology industry as a whole and of the FDA and USDA in particular. As a professor, bioethicist, and veterinarian, Dr. Fox has spearheaded the movement to foster the ethical treatment of animals (PETA), according to the agendas of the “Animal Rights Activists” since 1976. 

Michael W. Fox, former vice-president of the HSUS, said that, "to call an animal, with which you share your life a 'pet,' is reminiscent of men's magazines where you (a figure of speech, don't take it personally) have the Pet of the Month."  It is supposed that the continued use of the word "pet" to designate dogs or cats threatens to reduce their level of respect to the current status of twentieth century North American women.  ~The McGill Red Herring

PETA ad campaigns continue to roll off the press in PETA naked high profile "star" public nude and near-nude photo campaigns. It would appear that Michael W. Fox and the "Humane Society" has a blind eye (from his statement above) to their definition of "Pet of the Month."

The "Humane Society" ought to be targeting PETA Nudity Ads for the essence of hypocrisy in the "Humane Society" and PETA both representing North American women as PETA "Pets of the Month" in their own Animal Rights and nudity ad campaigns.

An "Animal Rights" activist generally has two reasons for doing a thing.  One thing, that sounds good also known as propaganda, and then the second thing, a real one, the Animal Rights alleged agenda to end pet ownership worldwide.

Exactly what benefit has the HSUS also termed "Humane Society" provided to innocent dogs, cats, and pet owners or their pets? Or has the HSUS and PETA been solely responsible to their own alleged "real" motivation of their millions in dollars of money in their pocket-books by donations and these activists are just 'sounding good' in their public statements for animal rights.

Today's Animal Rights activists have "perverted" once-sensible animal welfare goals and owner responsibilities by putting animals ahead of human beings and employing a "by any means necessary" philosophy to achieve their goals of "total animal liberation" and the destruction of pet ownership rights of the common man, woman or child.

Lead by PETA, the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), and other activist groups, the animal liberation movement does not seek to improve 'pets and animals' lives. Its goal is to place unnecessary legal restrictions on ordinary people and pet owners like you.

Today's "Humane Society" HSUS and PETA activists want to force you to eat nothing but beans and greens. They want to ban hunting, fishing, zoos, rodeos, and circuses and ultimately 'legally end with laws and ordinances' any pet ownership.

Some activists want to outlaw the use of animals in the search for cures for AIDS, Parkinson's disease, and Cancer. And a growing number of Animal Rights activists, are crossing the line from peaceful protest to violent crime. Other activists have allegedly trained animal control officers, who allegedly take the law into their own hands, by a "perverted" enforcement of animal control laws and ordinances to destroy pets thru pro-active pursuit of euthanasia and the incarceration of pet owners for questionable pet offenses around the country.

It's a terrible scam - Animal Rights. The world deserves to know the truth. History is the chronicle of divorces between creed and deed. As with history, like Noah in the Ark, it always begins with the animals. It’s time that We the People, divorce ourselves from this terrible scam of Animal Rights agenda to destroy all pet ownership on private property.

 

Animals are traditional property, now legally having “Intrinsic Value:”

Animals are human-kind's most ancient and traditional property. Before ever we settled down to a plot of land and threw seeds in the soil, we numbered animals as our most valuable possessions. Wealth has always been associated with the number of animals that a person owned, and kept. Now animal ownership, use, and the ancient, honorable practice of animal husbandry are under global attack by dog laws, animal ID laws globally. It was initiated by the animal "rights" movement, and adapted by local, state, and federal governments throughout the world.

A Dog's life has 'intrinsic value,' New York judge finds:

Finding that a dog "is somewhere between a person and personal property," a New York trial court said a pet owner whose dog died following unauthorized surgery may seek damages beyond the purchase price of the animal. "[A dog] is not an inanimate thing that just receives affection; it also returns it," the court wrote, citing Corso v. Crawford, 97 Misc. 2d 530 (N.Y., Queens County Civ. Ct. 1979).

 

Doing Away with Dog Ownership:

All the dog legislation, animal control laws, dog ownership licensing, animal breeder licensing and animal ID programs will effectively do away with all but the largest commercial breeders and providers. When the small traditional owner and holder have been the basis for our animals and economy world-wide, it soon will end with all animals owned being controlled through licensing of many types and behaviors.

The erosion of our freedom to own dogs, pets and animals, rings true of the current political climate in the USA, Canada, and the world, destroying the literal body of “pet ownership” freedom, by the blood sport of the Animal Rights propaganda agendas to mislead, distort, or distract from the real truth and need for pet ownership freedom. Animal Rights is the plague of the soul that has infected our society in ‘perverting’ what a good pet owner really is all about.

Animal care and control laws are only words written on paper, words that change on society's whim, and are interpreted differently daily by politicians, lawyers, judges, and policemen. We cannot by total reliance on law, escape our "duty" to judge right and wrong, and take "action" to stop the tyranny at "Freedom's Gate."

For a person's religion is not worth its salt, if their dogs, pets and animals are not the better for it.

 ###

  Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization Incorporated (Non-Profit)

"The truth is rarely pure and never simple."


PLEASE DONATE to Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization Incorporated (Non-Profit) BY CLICKING ON THE PAYPAL LINK BELOW:

https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=6721925

Fair Use Notice: Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
 
Legal Disclaimer: The information, articles, or links (posted, embedded or otherwise) to the above postings are provided to give readers more information on general dog-related or associated subjects and are not intended as legal advice. All individuals are urged to contact licensed attorneys in their states regarding specific legal issues.
 
Copyright © 2006-2009,  Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization Incorporated (Non-Profit) Iowa 2009, NationalDogPress News, All Rights Reserved 

An Open Letter to Mills County, Iowa Animal Control Authorities

 

An Open Letter to Mills County, Iowa Animal Control Authorities

Do I have to pay animal taxes on my "not" raised dogs with your office in Mills County, Iowa according to your new animal care and control county tyranny laws?

5 Dec 09

- SATIRE-

By Dean A. Ayers
Lead Investigative Reporter
NationalDogPress © 

Dear Mills County, Iowa Sires and Animal Care and Control Authorities,

My friend over at Well Fare, Iowa just received two subsidy checks for $1,000 each from their county government office of animal care and control run by the State of Iowa Animal Rights Activist Legislation Employment Office, for "not" raising dogs in Iowa counties. 

Right now I'm not getting any extra help from the government while I'm displaced from my previous employment because of the failing economy, so I want to go into the "not-raising-dogs" business, sponsored by State of Iowa and Mills County, Iowa Animal Rights Activist Legislation Employment Office, which I heard was sponsored by the National Animal Identification System (NAIS) created by the USDA. I heard allegedly that these new animal care and control laws you now have are now approved by Mills County, Iowa, Board of Supervisors, on 1 March 2009, in order to promote tyranny in animal care and control of law abiding dog and pet owners in your Iowa County. All of this animal control, of course, for the purpose of totally “taxing” dog and animal owners to “death” in the county, or face confiscation of their animals by the county animal controlling authorities. 

So in the spirit of following your new animal ‘taxation’ laws in Mills County, Iowa; what I want to know is, in your opinion, what is the best kind of dog home or animal farm "not" to raise dogs in, and what is the best breed of dogs "not" to raise in Mills County, Iowa? 

Do I have to register or license my "not" raised dogs with the new National Animal Identification System (NAIS) of the USDA, or with the Mills County, Iowa ARF Animal Control office? Also can I "not" report all the dogs that I will “not” own, every 24 hours as required by the NAIS regulations, when I do “not” move them off premises, so I will "not" be fined $1,000 a day, per "not" dog or animal, per "not" violating the regulations, according to the USDA NAIS and Mills County, Iowa anti-dog care and control regulations "not?" 

I want to be sure that I approach this endeavor of “not” raising any dogs with my family in Mills County, Iowa in keeping with all the USDA and Mills County, Iowa alleged governmental/corporation "taxation without representation" funded laws and policies that your animal care and control laws allegedly promote. I would prefer “not” to raise purebred, cross-breed, mixed dogs, or any rescued dogs, but if that is not a good type or breed "not" to raise as a family dog, then I will just as gladly "not" raise any AKC registered breed of dogs on my private property either, in Mills County, Iowa. 

As I see it, the hardest part of this USDA and Mills County, Iowa “animal taxation” and tyranny animal care and control legislation program will be in keeping an accurate inventory of how many dogs I have "not" raised.

That being said, in the "not" raising dogs for "unincorporated county area families" animal care and control brochures (not), for small dog non-producers, which I will qualify for; that this regulation and animal license and taxation program is “not” voluntary, even if my dogs are permanent indoor house dogs.

I need to know that as long as I "not" let the "not" raised family dogs off my private property, called "not" a dog owner premises," then I understand you will "not" subject my family to tyranny controlled ‘taxation’ and “harassment” on my private property about my “not” owned dogs under the Mills County, Iowa animal care and control animal taxation control legislation program that is now mandatory.

Can you please tell me if I got the Mills County, Iowa dog taxation facts correct from the new animal care and control laws you approved, Sire? I understand you all are "not" very responsive to citizens questions about this new animal care and control law, but that you all think you already have "all" the right answers at the USDA and Mills County, Iowa animal control authority office’s "not."

My friend, named Dam Pissed, is very joyful about the future of this Mills County, Iowa tyranny taxation of all the dogs in the rural county (especially any dog that never leaves the inside of their house), by your alleged agro-biz-incorporated sponsored "welfare" county business, of "not” raising dogs" in family homes on private property in the rural areas of this county." I also heard that you just essentially ‘copied’ the tyranny animal care and control ordinance from a neighboring county of Mills? Did you not know how to properly write animal care and control legislation that would actually be ‘fair’ to dog owners in the county? Was it really necessary to plagiarize tyranny animal control laws from someone else?

My friend, named DAM PISSED, has been raising his family dogs for twenty years or so, and the best he ever made on them was $422 in a county dog show prize award in 1988. Until this year 2009, when he got two subsidy checks for $1000 each for "not" raising any dogs anymore, from your USDA and his neighboring county in Iowa by their sponsored animal care, taxation, and control programs "not." 

If I can get $1000 (like my friend DAM PISSED) for each "not" raised family dog on my private property in Mills County, Iowa like my friend allegedly did in his county, then if I “not” raise 50 dogs on my private property in Mills County, Iowa will I get a bigger check of subsidy? For example, can I get $2000 for “not” raising 100 dogs, as long as I do "not" license them, and register them with the new National Animal Identification System (NAIS) "not"? 

Also, with the bad economy and high price of food now days, I am considering the "not” raising cows or hogs animal control program on family private property that the USDA and various Iowa Counties also sponsor from all those "not" so interested independent farmers “not” making any money on their family farms. I think they call them "mad cow" family operations don't they, so please send me any information you have on that subsidy program in Mills County, Iowa also for “not” raising those family pets or animals also. 

In view of these circumstances, Sires, you understand that I am now totally unemployed and that I have no money to pay for all these new ‘tyranny’ dog license taxes for “not” raising any dogs, pets or animals on my private property in Mills County, Iowa. There for I plan to file for Iowa State Unemployment and Federal Government food stamps also, while I am "not" raising all these NAIS and Mills County, Iowa controlled animals.

Sires, after you have began to tax me and my dogs, pets, and animals “to death” for simply owning my own dogs, pets or animals in your fine establishment of a county in Iowa with all these new animal care and control laws "not" will you subsidize my ‘burial” of pet ownership also?

Be assured, Sires, you all will have my VOTE in the coming elections for YOUR re-election. NOT!

Patriotic-ally Yours, 

Mr. Dog Smith, “A Man who just owns a pet dog inside his home as his family”. 

PS. Please notify me when you are giving out free Iowa surplus corn and cheese, from the independent animal home owners and farmers you run out of business by your tyranny animal taxation laws. 

PPS: TO ALL AMERICANS; For "Real" folks; Just VOTE, "NO" to Deadwood County, and State Politicians, who won't say "NO" to NAIS or the USDA or to STOP Anti-Pet, animal care and control county taxation and tyranny animal laws, spay/neuter to avoid taxation tyranny requirements, and unlawful and unconstitutional animal care and control legislation that does “not” provide “due process” for a pet owner before animal control can confiscate, seize or euthanize your dogs. This county has approved animal care and control regulations with an agenda to end American's freedoms and liberties to freely own animals and pets without government intrusion or violation of the U.S. Constitution and that is appalling! 

PPPS: Also, Stop the National Animal Identification System (NAIS) to "protect" America from corporate - government intervention into American's U.S. Constitutional freedoms on your "own" private property with animals called a premises.

PPPPS: Stop any and all perverted Anti-Pet Ownership ordinances, spay/neuter license requirements, and mandatory taxation for animal owner control legislation/laws that take away your rights to freely own and maintain your pets and dogs on your own private property. 

And by the way, please tell Mills County, Iowa...

"We the People Have the Right to Bear F.arms!" 

...AND OWN OUR DOGS, PETS AND ANIMALS ON PRIVATE PROPERTY WITHOUT GOVERNMENT INTRUSION!

###

Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization Incorporated (Non-Profit)

"The truth is rarely pure and never simple."


PLEASE DONATE to Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization Incorporated (Non-Profit) BY CLICKING ON THE PAYPAL LINK BELOW:

https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=6721925

Fair Use Notice: Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
 
Legal Disclaimer: The information, articles, or links (posted, embedded or otherwise) to the above postings are provided to give readers more information on general dog-related or associated subjects and are not intended as legal advice. All individuals are urged to contact licensed attorneys in their states regarding specific legal issues.
 
Copyright © 2006-2010,  Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization Incorporated (Non-Profit) Iowa 2009, NationalDogPress News, All Rights Reserved

Dog ordinance 'number limits' in Polk County, Iowa are not logical or valid – Will You Help Fight This Animal Control Tyranny?

 

Dog ordinance 'number limits' in Polk County, Iowa are not logical or valid – Will You Help Fight This Animal Control Tyranny?

Dog number limit ordinances in Polk County will lead to a decrease in pet licensing taxes by scared dog owners who are over the dog limit imposed.

 

POLK COUNTY, Iowa, 2 December 09 (NationalDogPress) --

Dogs and dog owners face more discrimination than ever before in American society, and now specifically in Polk County, Iowa for no apparent reason other than to enforce tyranny in dog “number limits” upon animal owners who appropriately take care of their dogs in their homes and on their private property in Polk County, Iowa.

Specifically, this Investigative Reporter has interviewed, Meaghan Potter-Lynch, a 19 year old, and upstanding citizen of Polk County who proudly owns and properly maintains the love, care and control of their dogs and goats at their residence in Polk County, Iowa.  Meaghan now is allegedly faced with having “all” the animals confiscated, for no other reason than for Animal Control to allegedly enforce their tyranny animal control “number limits” upon the good people of Polk County.

Meaghan stated to this Investigator, “All of my animals are up to date on shots, feed and watered properly, housed properly and loved more than anything in the world. “

It is alleged that Animal Control Authorities in Polk County, have “threatened” to confiscate “ALL” of Meaghan’s animals, when in actuality, animal control has apparently informed Meaghan that the “number limit” ordinance “allows” Meaghan to maintain three dogs on her property.  This allegedly appears to be “intimidation” by animal control, to get control of the people, thru the animal’s confiscation or alleged “threat” of total animal seizure, be told.

While local, city, county, state, and federal entities pay lip service to the dog as man’s best friend by passing tyranny dog limiting ordinances and laws, We the People as a whole community, and specifically in the community of Polk County, Iowa, have allowed fear and politics of their “Animal Control” and their “Animal Authorities” to run rampant (with citizens being unaware) by this alleged threat of tyranny animal enforcement to seize “ALL” of Meaghan’s animals on private property potentially resulting in a “total animal confiscation” of Meaghan’s “Intrinsic Valued” and beloved dogs and goats on their private property.   

This “real threat” of Animal Control Authorities allegedly “intimidating” Meaghan will determine the parameters of dog ownership based upon emotions not logic and common sense in law making for all citizens in Polk County, Iowa. 

Based upon the allegations of animal control to Meaghan and her dogs, and soon to possibly be (the same treatment) to the other citizens and residents of Polk County, Iowa, will the Polk County community “stand together” to fight off this tyranny of animal control or “fail” to get involved, -- and subsequently, each Polk County citizen, one by one, by one, will lose their animals in total, (each dog and every animal owner) in due time, in Polk County via “number limits” tyranny enforcement?  

This type of “number limit” control of the animals in Polk County, will leave their beloved dogs, pets, and animals, to be dealt with as “nothing” of value, other than being an animal having no more value than that of “chattel”.

Will the oppressor controlling all “number limits’ and animals in Polk County, Iowa become the hand of the “Mark of the Beast” in care, and control regardless of whether the citizens in Polk County, Iowa are properly maintaining their care and control of their dogs, pets, and animals on their own private property?

Time will surely tell, sooner rather than later, starting with Meaghan Potter-Lynch.

 

My question to the citizens of Polk County, Iowa who own pets and animals is:

Dog ordinance 'number limits' in Polk County, Iowa are not logical or valid – Will You Help Meaghan Potter-Lynch and their Dogs Fight This Animal Control Tyranny?

We the People, spend hundreds of millions of dollars on premium foods, veterinary care, toys, kennels, pet sitters, training classes, and more even while limiting the number and type of dogs an owner can house. We use dogs to aid in catching criminals, search for victims of crimes and natural disasters, help handicapped humans, and provide emotional support even while barring dogs from communities if they exceed a certain weight, certain breed to be banned, or limits to the number of dogs allowed in a home even if they are properly cared for and loved as family.

 

The disadvantages of 'dog number' limits in homes are:

Dog owners in some communities face a limit on the number of pets they can own, but these limits, too, are counterproductive.

Laws that criminalize pet ownership based on numbers alone have been declared unconstitutional in some states because they do not address the need to control nuisances or provide for the health and safety of residents.

The Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, the state’s highest court, has declared such a law unconstitutional in that state, citing a precedent in Kadash v City of Williamsport:

“What is not an infringement upon public safety and is not a nuisance cannot be made one by legislative fiat and then prohibited....

“Even legitimate legislative goals cannot be pursued by means which stifle fundamental personal liberty when the goals can otherwise be more reasonably achieved.”

A dog or pet limit ordinance is difficult to enforce without increased presence of animal control or police agencies and often leads to a decrease in pet licensing to prevent cross-referencing of license records. If the law is enforced only upon complaint, it becomes just another law for people to circumvent and further erodes confidence in legislative bodies.

Numbers have no relationship to nuisances. A person with one dog that runs loose or barks all night is a greater nuisance than a person with a dozen dogs that are quiet, clean, and kept at home.

Limiting people to four dogs (or fewer) puts an unreasonable strain on people who raise show dogs, compete in performance trials, participate in canine rescue operations, foster dogs for service dog organizations, etc. and can lead to those responsible dog owners leaving the community.

A number limit causes dog deaths by forcing people to give up dogs they own, thus causing crowding in local shelters; denying people the opportunity to buy an additional dog from a shelter or a rescue; and adversely impacting rescue groups and foster homes that help find new homes for dogs whose owners cannot keep them.

Alternatives to number limits are: 

• Passage and enforcement of strict nuisance laws.
• Use of an arbitrator to mediate neighborhood disputes about animals.
• Use of alternative sentencing such as community service at the county animal shelter or attendance at a full obedience training course for those who violate nuisance ordinances.
• Periodic programs or mailings about responsible dog ownership or city sponsorship of a Canine Good Citizen test to encourage residents to be responsible dog owners. 

Animal laws are not always a result of state and federal battles. Squabbles between neighbors often erupt over animals, squabbles that often spill over into law enforcement or animal control filed complaints to local governments.  

As an emotional result the local government greases the squeaky wheel complaints by citizens with even more stricter ordinances or other tacked on to the zoning code or the criminal codes to existing animal ordinances.

Dog limit ordinances are often passed out of frustration, with little consideration for the consequences or valid and factual basis to make any “positive or constructive” benefit to the community dog complaints, other than a government official “feel good” action giving We the People even more tyranny in our local animal control ordinances.

Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization Incorporated (Non-Profit)

"The truth is rarely pure and never simple."


PLEASE DONATE to Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization Incorporated (Non-Profit) BY CLICKING ON THE PAYPAL LINK:

https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=6721925


Fair Use Notice: Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
 
Legal Disclaimer: The information, articles, or links (posted, embedded or otherwise) to the above postings are provided to give readers more information on general dog-related or associated subjects and are not intended as legal advice. All individuals are urged to contact licensed attorneys in their states regarding specific legal issues.
 
Copyright © 2006-2009,  Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization Incorporated (Non-Profit) Iowa 2009, NationalDogPress News, All Rights Reserved

Dog Licensing Is An Outrage; Your Pet Belongs to You, Not the Government

Dog Licensing Is An Outrage Your Pet Belongs to You, Not the Government by Dean A. Ayers        The erosion of our freedom to own dogs, pets and animals, rings true of the current political climate in the USA Today. We the People who own dogs, cats, pets and animals are especially struck by the public’s statements concerning agreement or apathy towards all the various government licensing to include that of our pets and animals. Definition of Licensing and the Misconceptions: Most people seem to believe that a dog or pet license is a freedom, when in true fact, it is a taking. A license is a temporary, revocable permit issued by government that allows the holder to have something or to do something that is otherwise illegal. For example, in the USA the licensing of firearms has virtually removed our Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. Any time a license is issued, a freedom is jeopardized. By the very act of licensing dogs, the act of owning or even possessing a dog has been made illegal. Animals are traditional property, now legally having “Intrinsic Value:” Animals are human-kind's most ancient and traditional property. Before ever we settled down to a plot of land and threw seeds in the soil, we numbered animals as our most valuable possessions. Wealth has always been associated with the number of animals that a person owned, and kept. Now animal ownership, use, and the ancient, honorable practice of animal husbandry are under global attack by dog laws, animal ID laws globally. It was initiated by the animal "rights" movement, and adapted by local, state, and federal governments throughout the world. A Dog's life has 'intrinsic value,' New York judge finds: Finding that a dog "is somewhere between a person and personal property," a New York trial court said a pet owner whose dog died following unauthorized surgery may seek damages beyond the purchase price of the animal. "[A dog] is not an inanimate thing that just receives affection; it also returns it," the court wrote, citing Corso v. Crawford, 97 Misc. 2d 530 (N.Y., Queens County Civ. Ct. 1979). Doing Away with Dog Ownership: All the dog legislation, animal control laws, dog ownership licensing, animal breeder licensing and animal ID programs will effectively do away with all but the largest commercial breeders and providers. When the small traditional owner and holder have been the basis for our animals and economy world-wide, it soon will end with all animals owned being controlled through licensing of many types and behaviors, as well as the food we all eat for life will be controlled by the seed products being copyrighted thru large commercial concerns like Monsanto, and those of us who have traditionally grown our own food or owned animals personally for various reasons will be locked out or the owners will be locked up literally, also known as “Jail” or animal shelters, etc. Read the rest of the article Copyright © 2009 Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Org. Inc.

Dog Owner “due process” is not contained in current Animal Law – The Questions and Answers

 

Dog Owner “due process” is not contained in current Animal Law – The Questions and Answers

Due process is ‘not’ provided to dog owners in animal control ordinances before government authorities remove or euthanize their dogs from private property.

 

By Dean A. Ayers

Lead Investigative Reporter

NationalDogPress  ©

 

18 Nov 09

How Does Due Process Apply to Dog Seizure/Euthanasia Cases?

Despite the fact that animals are still considered property in all legal jurisdictions today, due process, whether rooted in the federal or state constitutions, extends to life, liberty, or property. The more complicated issue, however, is how much process is due?

The Supreme Court has promulgated a four prong test to determine this. In each situation, a court must weigh:

-the private interest affected by the official action

-the risk of an erroneous deprivation of that interest through the procedures used,

-the probable value of additional procedural safeguards, and

-the government interest involved.


Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319, 335 (1976).

Does Due process requires the opportunity to be heard at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner?

Rabon v. City of Seattle (Rabon II), 107 Wash.App. 734, 743 (2001) (citing Mathews, 424 U.S. at 333). Thus, when individuals can show they will suffer irreparable harm from a post-deprivation hearing, courts has recognized that a pre-deprivation hearing is necessary. In the case of orders to euthanize pets, many courts have considered the loss to the pet owner as irreparable.


Before any court hearing can dog owners file a Petition for a Preliminary Injunction?

Dog owners should file a petition for an injunction to delay the killing of the dog until they have had the chance to be heard in court (For an actual example, see Petition for Preliminary and Permanent Injunction in the case of Wilson v. City of St. Louis (1990), which involved a Pit Bull named "Max" who was impounded and classified as dangerous because he allegedly killed the neighbor’s dog. The Circuit Court found that the plaintiff would suffer irreparable harm if the preliminary injunction was not granted and enjoined the city from killing or otherwise harming Max. The court ordered the city to release Max and change his dangerous designation to potentially dangerous.)


Is there any way of overriding a bad decision by a petition for a writ of Mandamus?

Due process includes more than just going through the motions of a hearing. In fact, even after hearings have been granted, decisions can be challenged as a prejudicial abuse of discretion that is not based on findings of fact or law. (This is what the owners of Boo, a bull mastiff who allegedly bit a child, argued in Williams v. Orange County Animal Control (1996)). In this case, owners should file a Petition for a Writ of Mandamus, a judicial remedy issued by a superior court to compel a government officer to do or forbear from doing a specific act, to delay the euthanasia order until the appeal can be heard. This writ of mandamus applies in any situation in which the euthanasia should be stayed, including scenarios in which an original hearing was never given.


What are the minimum standards of Due Process for a hearing for dog owners?

It is now also clear that hearings must meet certain minimum standards. Informal reviews that animal control agencies frequently provide upon the dog owners request often do not fulfill these requirements, because the decision-maker may not be qualified to render the judgment or may not be impartial if he also made the original decision to euthanize the dog. For example, in Phillips v San Luis Obispo County Dept., 228 Cal.Rptr. 101 Cal.App. (2 Dist., 1986), the owners of Missy, a black lab known to have a bad habit of biting children, contested the city’s decision to euthanize her. The amicus brief filed by Joyce Tischler of the Animal Legal Defense Fund pointed out the Municipal Codes at issue did not provide for the Animal Regulation Directors orders to be reviewed by the Chief Sanitarian of the County Health Department or the supervising environmental health officer, the two individuals who presided over the first and second hearings.


Are there any challenges to the animal ordinance itself?

In fact, many city ordinances are flawed in that they fail to specify that owners are entitled to hearings before their pets are euthanized. These municipal codes can be challenged as unconstitutional and, even if the city already granted hearings that met minimum due process standards, the decision to euthanize the pet would still have to be overturned. Otherwise, whether dog owners generally would receive due process would be at the whim of the animal control agency, and the city could avoid having to correct its municipal codes simply by voluntarily giving all dog owners a hearing. The court of appeals in Missy's case agreed, concluding that the ordinances here are unconstitutional for failure to provide for notice and a hearing either before or after the seizure of an uncontrollable biting or vicious dog.

Most recently, in a landmark case, the court of appeals in Mansour v. King County, 128 P.3d 1241 (Wash.App. Div. 1, 2006) held that due process required even more than offering owners a hearing, ordering that an agency seeking to enforce a removal order must prove both the violation and the remedy it has imposed by a preponderance of the evidence. This is the same standard of proof imposed on the government when it attempts to temporarily remove a child from the custody of his parents. By instituting a burden of proof on the city, the court was essentially finding that the dog must be presumed innocent until the city can prove otherwise. Previously, there had been no standard of proof, and reviewing courts would only look to see if Animal Control had acted arbitrarily or capriciously. Thus, even the most minimal evidence that a dog should be removed would suffice, and owners would bear the burden of proving their pets innocent. Moreover, the court found that due process attached not only for orders to euthanize an animal, but also for orders of removal outside the county (Peter Mansour had been ordered to remove his dog from the county or turn his dog over to the city to be euthanized after his dog was accused of killing a cat).

Finally, the court held that due process required Mansour to have the ability to subpoena records and witnesses in his defense, and that the Notice and Order of Violation had to specify exactly what code provisions had been violated. Merely issuing a brief and concise description of the conditions for finding the violation is insufficient. Mansour was entitled to know ahead of time exactly what the County needed to prove at the Board hearing. If in fact it could not prove that Maxine violated a code provision that supported the removal order, he [Mansour] was entitled to know that in time to move for a dismissal at the Board level. Source Reference: Animal Legal and Historical Center.


Are there some significant problems with animal care, control, and dangerous dog laws and euthanasia execution solutions?

1. They do not reduce the number of neglect, abuse, or dog bite incidents that are legitimate in law. By focusing on the after-effects of the animal complaint of alleged neglect, abuse or a dog bite, these laws do not take any measures to prevent future neglect, abuse, animal care, pet owner control, or prevent dog bites. In theory, the risk of animal care and control ordinance punishment is for a motivation to change behavior. But most dog owners do not believe their dogs to be dangerous or the owners to be abusive or neglectful. So the perception is that these animal care and control laws are for 'other' dogs, problem dogs, but not their dog. Then, when a dog complaint, incident or dog bite allegedly occurs, that particular dog owner may face additional liability, but his/her friends and neighbors will not change their habits regarding their own dogs. These animal care and control laws 'do not' work as a viable solution.

2. The animal laws do not take into account the severity of the incident. Most animal care, control and dangerous dog laws cover a huge range of behavior from "threatening displays" to actual bites to simple care, and control of the dog(s). What this means is that you may be as liable for your goofy social dog rushing out the door and charging gleefully at a neighbor as another owner is for an under socialized, aggressive dog who bites a child on the face. Are these equal? Under many dangerous dog laws, they are. Additionally, animal care and control laws are intentionally 'vague' and 'interpretive' by animal control authorities. Thus the facts of alleged animal care and control, is rarely 'pure' and never 'simple.' And may not even be factually the 'truth' except by a personal (opinion) 'interpretation' of the animal control authority.


What does a lack of “due process” for dog owners come down to?

Dangerous dog laws, and animal care and control laws are a feel-good attempt to show the community that that authorities are taking action, even with a simple animal care or control complaint or a dog bite incident.

Unfortunately these animal laws do not provide any protective effects to change animal - owner behavior, merely punishment after the fact. There are many things that a community can do to prevent dog bites, animal neglect, animal abuse, or other care and control issues, including educating dog owners, parents, rural families or farmers, and citizens how to supervise and when to intervene in kid-and-dog, or dog-and-dog, interactions, teaching dog owners how to socialize and train their dogs with methods that encourage friendly behavior and providing some basic animal education about canine body language so the many misunderstandings we have with dogs each day can be reduced in their care and control issues.


Dog owners need to learn how to defend their dogs from ‘rogue’ Animal Control Authorities before they are confiscated, seized, and euthanized before you (as the dog owner) can obtain Legal Counsel.

 

 

More questions and answers we need to ask about “Due Process”.

 

DUE PROCESS is what is missing from the ordinance of animal laws, which are in force in most jurisdictions today.

 

1. IF YOU ARE FACED WITH CONFISCATION OR EUTHANASIA ISSUES CURRENTLY OR BEFORE. 

 

 It is necessary that you seek counsel from an attorney BEFORE you allow any authority to confiscate your dogs, pets, or animals, and ask the attorney to intervene with authorities to stop the process, based on a review of their animal laws being used, that DO NOT contain DUE PROCESS for the pet owners according to law case precedent established in this article and case law. In this way it is very likely the confiscation can be stopped or overturned, based on an unconstitutional law.

 

2. HOW TO ESTABLISH "DUE PROCESS" WHEN NOT IN A PRESENT DOG CONFISCATION CASE.

 

It is necessary to make enough flack or waves, thru getting the word out to your local animal control legislators for the jurisdiction you are in, to make them see the light, that current animal control laws and ordinances are UNCONSTITUTIONAL, as they DO NOT contain the lawful DUE PROCESS established by these case precedents in this article containing the case law establishing the requirements for DUE PROCESS before confiscation or euthanasia. It will take aggressive campaigning and raising the flag to the locals to get a campaign going for animal control law reform in your local town, county, and state. But this needs to be done, to change the law to protect the pet owners from the current level of tyranny without law controls on THEM.

 

3. MOST NEEDED, BUT COSTLY TO THE POCKET BOOK.

 

The fastest and most public attention gathering method to change the animal laws to include the DUE PROCESS in this article is to have an attorney file a lawsuit against the jurisdiction, CHALLENGING THE CONSTITUTIONALITY of the animal law currently in force. When you establish thru evidence of the LACK OF DUE PROCESS IN THEIR ANIMAL LAWS, in court in a law suit, the Judge will have no alternative but to OVERTURN the current animal law, and it will be thrown out (the law will be) like the dish water for being Unconstitutional and vague. Thus the animal law is nullified, and no longer in force, at that moment, and the legislators will have to START OVER in creating a new animal law, that INCLUDES the ruling of a need for Constitutional DUE PROCESS included in the local animal law.

 

4. It is not as simple as just telling an animal control authority, that there is no Due Process.

 

Animal Control like cops will do ANYTHING they DAMN WELL PLEASED to you, UNTIL, and UNLESS, you OBTAIN AN ATTORNEY, to establish legal precedents to stop them. It ALWAYS comes down to working thru an attorney, BEFORE the pets or animals are confiscated or euthanized.  The word needs to spread, that people, need to have A PLAN OF ACTION, and ATTORNEY AT HAND, BEFORE they are ever faced with Animal Control, in order to stop them from tyranny. If Animal Control, knocks on your door, and you refuse them entry. You have only the amount of time, it takes for them to obtain a search and seizure warrant from a judge, and their time to come back to you, in order for YOU TO GET AN ATTORNEY AND START THIS NEGOTIATION PROCESS OF DUE PROCESS, if your animal laws do NOT contain the Proper Due Process in the current Animal Laws (which almost every Animal Law in the nation does NOT have).

 

5. This is what must be done, by every citizen with a pet, to get DUE PROCESS in their jurisdiction.

 

First off, GET AN ATTORNEY, to represent you, in each case listed above. Preferably an Attorney at Law WITH some experience in Animal Law.

###

 

Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization Incorporated (Non-Profit)

"The truth is rarely pure and never simple."


PLEASE DONATE to Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization Incorporated (Non-Profit) BY CLICKING ON THE PAYPAL LINK BELOW:

https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=6721925

Fair Use Notice: Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
 
Legal Disclaimer: The information, articles, or links (posted, embedded or otherwise) to the above postings are provided to give readers more information on general dog-related or associated subjects and are not intended as legal advice. All individuals are urged to contact licensed attorneys in their states regarding specific legal issues.
 
Copyright © 2006-2009,  Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization Incorporated (Non-Profit) Iowa 2009, NationalDogPress News, All Rights Reserved

Animal laws and officers enforce nincompoop "dweeb" tyranny

 

Animal laws and officers enforce nincompoop "dweeb" tyranny 

Animal laws that limit the number of animals allowed in a household or vaguely define a “bad smell” in the pet owner’s home are intended to make it easier to prosecute individuals.

By Dean A. Ayers

Lead Investigative Reporter

NationalDogPress ©

14 Nov 09

 

Many dog owners in recent years have faced the unthinkable; a knock at their door that has heralded the arrival of an Animal Control officer with a complaint about your dog(s). In some cases that visit has been concluded satisfactorily to both the dog owner and the animal control officer; in others it has meant the heartache of either seizure of the owner’s dog(s) and/or facing stiff fines for various reasons in an abuse, neglect, or number limit citation.

With animal ownership laws now undergoing radical evolving changes throughout the country, the result is now a ‘perverted’ evolving animal “activist” produced animal care and control law now being used. Animal rights ‘extremists' some of which are in fact, animal control officers, and others working in animal  rights group legislation lobbies are the new means for dog owner 'harassment.' The constant upgrade of these radical ‘animal controlling’ laws drastically increases the ‘real’ possibility of a visit to your door on your own private property from Animal Control Authorities becoming ever more of a specter to haunt you and also every dog owner in the nation.

Specifically targeted by legislation ‘activists’ are creating the laws that 'limit' the number of dogs, cats, pets, and animals allowed in a household (by an unsubstantiated arbitrary pet ‘limit’ number) which is intended to make it easier to prosecute individuals who are thought to have "too many," according to this arbitrary standard put into the animal law.  Even more sinister is that these ‘activist’ pushed animal laws are also applied even to those people who are not in violation of health, nuisance and humane laws.

These dog or animal "number limit" laws are now being joined by various other anti-pet ownership restrictive laws, such as mandatory breeder permits and licensing requirements (being pursued for example at this time in Iowa legislation) for even a single one time litter of any dog and the owner is now faced with major state intrusive inspections for a kennel or breeder license for having more than 3 pets in the home, or having a single litter of puppies. All of this being “PAINTED” as the need to stop alleged puppy mills, which of course in most instances is “bull”. Other totally vague animal control laws that can threaten responsible dog owners who are not in any kind of notable breeding or kenneling business are those ‘activist’ lobbied animal laws that allow the animal control officer to ‘define’ the offense of “BAD SMELL” in the home as a violation in animal control care and control laws.  Many good and loving pet owners whose dogs are well cared for and kept as their extended family members are suddenly in violation of an animal control officers “definition of “BAD SMELL” in the home, based upon the pets living in their homes, rather than caged outside alone and exposed to the climate, like a beast.

Why, there are many people, who object to a ‘single turd’ in a field that can be smelled downwind from 3 miles away, and object to that smell as a “BAD SMELL” under animal law or other people who are obsessed, compelled or driven to use massive amounts of dangerous cleaning products (by the liter or gallon) in a home (that are dangerous to the health of the animals and humans alike)to kill any and all ‘bad’ smells; so take into account an ‘activist’ animal control officer, who is this described ‘clean freak’ inspecting pet owner homes, using this vague and intrusive animal law as a criminal, abusive, or neglectful animal law violation according to their ‘definition of a ‘BAD SMELL’ in the pet owners home.

This vague and intrusive ‘unbalanced’ definition of tyranny control in the animal law begs for fees, fines, confiscations, seizures, and ultimate adoption or euthanasia of properly maintained pet owner animals in their home. Tyranny at its core to allow an ‘activist’ animal control officer to ‘harass’ and ‘intimidate’ virtually any pet owner in their jurisdiction, based solely upon a “BAD SMELL?” Please! These ‘activist’ animal laws have completely gone over the edge of the cliff in dealing in ‘reality’ and ‘common sense’.

'Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom' National Organization Incorporated (Nonprofit) is actively opposing all restrictive legislation limiting the responsible pet ownership of all dogs, cats, and other pets. Unfortunately some 'perverted' anti-pet ownership laws have still made their way onto the books. Just take a look at the 94 + page anti-pet ordinance of Louisville, KY by its Metro council, or the tyranny animal control laws with a three strike violation rule, taking away any right to owning any pet or animal in Omaha, Nebraska, or the 3-strike violation rule in Mills County, Iowa if your little 'fluffy' is caught off your private property 3 times. Your little "Fluffy" will be declared a "dangerous dog" according to their animal care and control ordinance for the county. How’s that for success in animal control laws stopping animal crimes in the midst of a rural county? These ‘activist’ based and promoted animal tyranny laws are occurring all across the nation as we speak. Ever more intrusive and controlling by the day.

For all dog owners, do we need reminded that it is important to promote the need for responsible freedom in the care and ownership of your dog(s) and pets in order to prevent tyranny from overcoming common sense in dog ownership matters? Or is it going to take a ‘knock at your door’ and an unlawful dog confiscation without any ‘due process’ for the dog owner to open your eyes to the truth in animal law "tyranny" now days?

 

Breeding even a single dog litter is now the ‘target’ of license laws

There is great value to society in the historic preservation of all our pet ownership of our chosen dog breeds as extended members of our family, and in the selective, planned breeding of our pets, for desirable and predictable traits in our chosen and favored dog breeds as well.

Claims that the organized dog fancy or local backyard hobby dog breeders contributes to the problem of homeless dogs in shelters cannot be supported by any alleged evidence from any Animal Rights activist groups, such as PETA, ELF, ALF, HSUS, ASPCA or any local humane society through facts that are real, not manufactured like liberal propaganda.

Above all else, dog owners, backyard dog hobbyists and dog fanciers must all become aware of the animal control laws in their own locale, and must also be aware of their 'rights' if faced with that ‘intrusive’ visit from an Animal Control Officer or Law Enforcement Officer regarding your pets and animals, and their ability to ‘harass’ you with vague and ‘interpretive’ definitions of the animal laws.

It is necessary for all dog and pet owners  to be familiar with all animal identification regulations for your dogs in your locale, as the future to continued further 'restrictive' local, county, state, or federal animal care, control, or identification regulations are potentially, only a 'stroke of the pen' away from being amended to include identification of many non-farm related pets and animals to be further controlled and cared for by government laws, due to any potential future transmission of a communicable animal disease in dogs or other pets or animals that may arise.

At that time, you and your dogs, and animals will then have to deal with Federal, State, and local animal control regulations on your private property, called a premises. Not only will you have a real possibility of 'animal control' showing up with restrictive regulations and ordinances of your dogs and your ownership freedom, but you will also have to deal with the 'dog-ma' of inspector police from the USDA animal and agriculture authorities or your state controlled 'dog-cops' checking your animals on your private property premises as well.

ALWAYS, Always, always, educate yourself and learn your animal control laws for your area and 'stand your ground' in knowing your 'rights' in responsible dog ownership. Always insure you have a name, and contact number for an Attorney at Law that is familiar with ‘Animal Law” in order to represent you and your dogs, not if, but when, the ‘activists’ in animal control come knocking at your door.

Remember when it comes to freely owning your dogs, pets and animals in an area frequented by Animal Rights Activists or Animal Control, "The truth is rarely pure and never simple."

NationalDogPress ©

  

 Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization Incorporated (Non-Profit)

"The truth is rarely pure and never simple."


PLEASE DONATE to Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization Incorporated (Non-Profit) BY CLICKING ON THE PAYPAL LINK BELOW: 

https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=6721925

Fair Use Notice: Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
 
Legal Disclaimer: The information, articles, or links (posted, embedded or otherwise) to the above postings are provided to give readers more information on general dog-related or associated subjects and are not intended as legal advice. All individuals are urged to contact licensed attorneys in their states regarding specific legal issues.
 
Copyright © 2006-2009,  Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization Incorporated (Non-Profit) Iowa 2009, NationalDogPress News, All Rights Reserved

NationalDogPress ©, Lead Investigative Reporter - Dean A. Ayers

Visit our many nationally published pet and animal articles and postings at the following links. Then be sure to come back and read the rest of this web site's pages and articles as well.


http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/members/16235/Dean%20A.%20Ayers/

and

http://www.associatedcontent.com/user/583274/dean_a_ayers.html

and

http://www.AnimalsClubFreedom.typepad.com/

Dean A. Ayers is a prior United States Air Force Special Agent for the AFOSI. His duties included that of law enforcement specialist, criminal, fraud, and counter-intelligence. He was assigned to felony crimes in federal government, fraud, waste and abuse investigations of the military branches of service, and counter-intelligence in overseas locations. Dean was also a former Texas State Commissioned Alamo State Park Armed Ranger.

Dean is currently Director, Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization Incorporated (Nonprofit) and Dean is also a Lead Investigative Reporter for the NationalDogPress©, and DogPress.org news press services.

EMAIL: Dogpressorg@aol.com

Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization Incorporated (Non-Profit)

"The truth is rarely pure and never simple."


PLEASE DONATE to Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization Incorporated (Non-Profit) BY CLICKING ON THE PAYPAL LINK BELOW:

https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=6721925

Fair Use Notice: Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
 
Legal Disclaimer: The information, articles, or links (posted, embedded or otherwise) to the above postings are provided to give readers more information on general dog-related or associated subjects and are not intended as legal advice. All individuals are urged to contact licensed attorneys in their states regarding specific legal issues.
 
Copyright © 2006-2009,  Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization Incorporated (Non-Profit) Iowa 2009, NationalDogPress News, All Rights Reserved