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

WARNING; Access USDA Dog or Animal Information & Govt. Owns YOU!

NationalDogPress ©

by Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Org. Inc. (Nonprofit)

Access USDA Dog Information, and the U.S. Government Owns YOUR Computer and Information On Your Computer

19 Dec 09, 1:55am

USDA Web Site, (NationalDogPress) --

1. On the USDA's web site that allows public access to needed dog, horse, or animal information reports and statistics, you first need to be aware of one important fact BEFORE accessing their information, as follows:

2. NOTICE: IF YOU ACCESS THE USDA DOG OR ANIMAL FILES BY COMPUTER ON THEIR WEB SITE, YOUR COMPUTER AND ALL INFORMATION ON YOUR COMPUTER WILL BECOME GOVERNMENT PROPERTY. YOU FIRST MUST CONSENT TO YOUR COMPUTER AND FILES, BECOMING THE GOVERNMENT PROPERTY AND LEGALLY ACCESSIBLE BY THE USDA AND US GOVERNMENT FOREVER MORE BEFORE YOU CAN ACCESS THEIR FILES AND REPORTS.

3. Link to this information Government Warning Disclosure.

http://acissearch.aphis.usda.gov/LPASearch/faces/Warning.jspx

 

Click I AGREE to continue.

******************** WARNING ******************* You are accessing a U.S. Government information system, which includes (1) this computer, (2) this computer network, (3) all computers connected to this network, and (4) all devices and storage media attached to this network or to a computer on this network. This information system is provided for U.S. Government-authorized use only. Unauthorized or improper use of this system may result in disciplinary action, as well as civil and criminal penalties. By using this information system, you understand and consent to the following: You have no reasonable expectation of privacy regarding any communications or data transiting or stored on this information system. At any time, the government may for any lawful government purpose monitor, intercept, search and seize any communication or data transiting or stored on this information system. Any communications or data transiting or stored on this information system may be disclosed or used for any lawful government purpose. Your consent is final and irrevocable. You may not rely on any statements or informal policies purporting to provide you with any expectation of privacy regarding communications on this system, whether oral or written, by your supervisor or any other official, except USDA’s Chief Information Officer. ******************** WARNING *******************

Source:  http://www.aphis.usda.gov/

 

 

© NationalDogPress News, All Rights Reserved

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

 

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

__._,_.___

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 

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

Alaska Fisherman's Take on Sarah Palin - No Holds Barred

 

Subject: Alaska Fisherman's Take on Sarah Palin - No Holds Barred

Dewey Whetsell a longtime commercial fisherman, veteran fire fighter and fire chief, jazz musician, and poet from Alaska penned a very nice retort to all of those who would say Sarah Palin isn't the real deal, a true leader.

Those who follow Alaska politics know these stories well, but the rest of America should understand this as well.

Here is Dewey's letter:

No matter where you fall in the wide spectrum of thought on Sarah Palin's ability and as a person, I think this really captures the essence of what she did as Governor of Alaska. I tend personally to admire her if for no other reason than she sends the left into a blind paroxysm of pure HATRED toward her. It always makes me laugh when adults start foaming at the mouth for no good reason.

By Dewie Whetsell, Alaskan Fisherman.

(As posted in comments on Greta's article referencing the MOVEON ad about Sarah Palin.)

The last 45 of my 66 years I've spent in a commercial fishing town in Alaska .  I understand Alaska politics but never understood national politics well until this last year.  Here's the breaking point: Neither side of the Palin controversy gets it.  It's not about persona, style, rhetoric, it's about doing things.  Even Palin supporters never mention the things that I'm about to mention here.

1- Democrats forget when Palin was the "Darling of the Democrats" because as soon as Palin took the Governor's office away from a fellow Republican and tough SOB, Frank Murkowski, she tore into the Republican's "Corrupt Bastards Club" (CBC) and sent them packing. Many of them are now residing in State housing and wearing orange jump suits. The Democrats reacted by skipping around the yard, throwing confetti and singing, "la la la la" (well, you know how they are). Name another governor in this country that has ever done anything similar. But while you're thinking, I'll continue.

2- Now with the CBC gone, there were fewer Alaskan politicians to protect the huge, giant oil companies here. So, she constructed and enacted a new system of splitting the oil profits called "ACES." Exxon (the biggest corporation in the world) protested and Sarah told them, "don't let the door hit you in the stern on your way out." They stayed, and Alaska residents went from being merely wealthy to being filthy rich. Of course, the other huge international oil companies meekly fell in line. Again, give me the name of any other governor in the country that has done anything similar.

3- The other thing she did when she walked into the governor's office is she got the list of State requests for federal funding for projects, known as "pork." She went through the list, took 85% of them and placed them in he "when-hell-freezes-over" stack. She let locals know that if we need something built, we'll pay for it ourselves. Maybe she figured she could use the money she got from selling the previous governor's jet because it was extravagant. Maybe she could use the money she saved by dismissing the governor's cook (remarking that she could cook for her own family), giving back the State vehicle issued to her, maintaining that she already had a car, and dismissing her State provided security force (never mentioning - I imagine - that she's packing heat herself). I'm still waiting to hear the names of those other governors.

4- Now, even with her much-ridiculed "gosh and golly" mannerism, she also managed to put together a totally new approach to getting a natural gas pipeline built which will be the biggest private construction project in the history of North America. No one else could do it although they tried. If that doesn't impress you, then you're trying too hard to be unimpressed while watching her do things like this while baking up a batch of brownies with her other hand.

5- For 30 years, Exxon held a lease to do exploratory drilling at a place called Point Thompson. They made excuses the entire time why they couldn't start drilling. In truth they were holding it like an investment. No governor for 30 years could make them get started. This summer, she told them she was revoking their lease and kicking them out. They protested and threatened court action. She shrugged and reminded them that she knew the way to the court house.  Alaska won again!

6- President Obama wants the nation to be on 25% renewable resources for electricity by 2025. Sarah went to the legislature and submitted her plan for Alaska to be at 50% renewables by 2025. We are already at 25%. I can give you more specifics about things done, as opposed to style and persona. Everybody wants to be cool, sound cool, look cool. But that's just a cover-up. I'm still waiting to hear from liberals the names of other governors who can match what mine has done in two and a half years. I won't be holding my breath. By the way, she was content to return to AK after the national election and go to work, but the haters wouldn't let her. Now these adolescent screechers are obviously not scuba divers. And no one ever told them what happens when you continually jab and pester a barracuda. Without warning, it will spin around and tear your face off. Shoulda known better.

You have just read the truth about Sarah Palin that sends the media, along with the democrat party, into a wild uncontrolled frenzy to discredit her. I guess they are only interested in skirt chasers, dishonesty, immoral people, liars, womanizers, murderers, and bitter ex-presidents' wive.

So "You go Girl." I only wish the men in Washington had your guts, determination, honesty, and morals.

I rest my case.

Only FOOLS listen to the biased media.

###

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

Why I don't go to church without my dog

 

Why I don't go to church without my dog

Depend on God and Dog – That is my Church of Religion involving the Dogs!

28 Nov 09

By Dean A. Ayers

Lead Investigative Reporter

NationalDogPress 

The “WORD” of the Bible in many forms, contains various descriptive uses of the term “Dog” but in reality of our Lord and God, the true meaning and existence of a “Dog” has been taken out of context by religion, churches, or even in the descriptions in the Bible. In order to begin an accurate discussion on this topic, we must first examine what descriptions of the term “Dog” are actually in the Bible. I provide many of these Bible descriptions in excerpts as follows:

 

“Dog” references in the Bible

The watch of the house, and of the flock (Isaiah 56:10-11; Job 30:1) … which fall from their master's table." More commonly owner-less, and banded in troops which divide cities into so many quarters; each half-starved, ravenous troop keeps to its own quarter, and drives off any intruder; feeding on blood, dead bodies, and offal; therefore regarded as "unclean" (1 Kings 14:11; 1 Kings 16:4; 1 Kings 21:19; 1 Kings 21:23; 1 Kings 22:38; 2 Kings 9:10; 2 Kings 9:35-36)

Their dismal howling at night are alluded to in Psalm 59:6; Psalm 59:14-15; "they return at evening, they make a noise like a dog, and go round about the city"; perhaps in allusion to Saul's agents thirsting for David's blood coming to Michal's house at evening, and to the retribution on Saul in kind, when he who had made David a wanderer himself wandered about seeking vainly for help against the Philistines, and went at last by night to the witch of Endor. As unclean (Isaiah 66:3) … dog, dead dog, dog's head, are terms of scorn or else self-abasement (1 Samuel 24:14; 2 Samuel 3:8; 2 Samuel 9:8; 2 Samuel 16:9; 2 Kings 8:13)

A wanton, self-prostituting man is called a "dog" (Deuteronomy 23:18)

One Egyptian god had a dog form. "Beware of the (Greek) dogs," those impure persons of whom I told you often" (Philemon 3:2; Philemon 3:18-19)

…dogs in filthiness, snarling, and ferocity against the Lord and His people (Psalm 22:16; Psalm 22:20)

… Backsliding into former carnality, as the dog "is turned to his own vomit again" (2 Peter 2:22)

The Jews regarded the Gentiles as "dogs," but by unbelief they ceased to be the true Israel and themselves became dogs (Isaiah 56:10-11) "Deliver my darling from the power of the dog."

Not only are there many references or descriptions to the term “Dog” in the Bible, but in many other faiths and their writings as well all over the globe, to include African Mythology as follows:

"Juok and the Dog That Preserved Mankind (Anuak/Sudan)". Juok (Jwok), the creator, the Supreme Being, was an androgynous god, an all-powerful and omniscient spirit. He had sons—first an elephant; then a buffalo, a lion, a crocodile; after that, a little dog; and, finally, man and woman. When he saw the humans, beings without hair, Juok told the dog to throw them away. The dog took the humans to a tree, and put the children into a hole in that tree. Then, without his knowledge, the dog milked a cow from among God's herds and fed the children. The children grew up, got too big for the tree, so the dog took them to the country, where they built a house. They became a man and a woman. (Excerpt from: A Dictionary of African Mythology, Author, Harold Scheub) 

Could this be where the term, “DOG” can be spelling reversed into the meaning of “GOD”?

DOG vs. GOD in reverse spelling

The spelling reversal of the term “DOG” into meaning “GOD” has been a sore spot among Christians, Islam, Muslims, and other religions or faiths for a very long time.  I have seen many of the weary skeptics who thought the healing of humans thru a personal interaction with a dog was just a “dog and pony” show to draw people into a group or even a church.  I have found since, there is some truth in my skepticism, but like anything else, one bad apple doesn’t mean that the rest of them are bad - unless it is left unattended to, then it will eventually spread rot throughout the entire basket of life.  Jesus warned us about such teachings -- He used yeast as His example, how it takes such a little amount to work its way through the dough making it impure (Lk 12:1-3 & Matt 16:12). 

My contention and message here is that there are many types of "Dog Value Doubters" and “Dog Haters” in this world, and even in many religions and faiths who claim to be of God. An example of this wrongful “hatred” of dogs can easily be found in Islam, Muslims, and many Animal Rights groups as well.

 

The health and wealth messages preached but fail to speak about the dogs

By some , these above groups or religions have left a bad image toward something God has intended as a great and wonderful gift - THE DOG.  To some, whenever the words faith and healing are said in the same sentence as a dog, it is usually dismissed as one of those tongue talking health and wealth or animal fanatics.

Having been raised in a conservative church, I am aware that there is not much tolerance for any type of "healing" except that of their “WORD” of the Church you attend, and their “WORD” rarely if ever includes the extended family of humans, called “The Dog.”  The DOG is a valid source of healing one’s spirit, soul, and body thru the interaction of a dog with the human.  I have visited many congregations in churches that preach health and wealth in their churches and couldn’t get past all the hype, glitter, performance, and racket, and lack of caring for any animals, and specifically the “dog” as a true "intrinsic value" to life. 

The two most common beliefs that seem to rub people the wrong way, and have for many years, are the health and prosperity movements - “Health and Wealth” or “Name it and Claim it”, also known as Animal Rights movements, that promote “vegetarianism” and the “hatred” for humans to freely own pets and maintain animals in their care and control.  These Animal Rights and animal hater religious or political movements have become primary reasons why so many religious believers are cautious about even the thought of healing outside of a physician’s care, let alone the healing power of the love and caring for an innocent animal like the dog.  

What a shame to discount the dog's power to heal, regardless of the means of healing it is still God who does the healing and he does so thru the power of the innocence, interaction, and love in the “dog”.  At one end of the spectrum there are those who do not believe in physicians, hospitals, or medicine, or animal healing, etc.  At the other end are those who put all their faith solely in physicians, hospitals, medicine, etc., yet still none in the dog.  Yet they both still do not look to healing their bodies, spirits and souls thru companionship with a good and loving dog as a healing therapy.

It may be God’s will for us to go through an illness or a disease, if not for our own good, maybe for the good of another.  We are called to be the light and salt. (Mt 5:13-14)  If we spend time grumbling about being ill we may miss the purpose and the blessing God has for us.  There is nothing wrong with turning to God saying, “I don’t know the purpose, nor do I like the illness, but help me understand, give me the strength and understanding to persevere in doing your will not mine.” And then each of us needs to turn to “man’s best friend” for the healing power of the dog. 

We shouldn’t try to under estimate God’s purpose for our lives, if we think shallow, shallow is where we’ll stay, and if we think only of ourselves, selfishness is a lonely place. But when we are lacking in our ability to control our lives, either because of monetary, health, or wellness issues, we need to start the “healing” process by turning our selfishness for “serving our own needs and wants” to serving our Lord and Master, by turning our attentions to our dogs as their Master in the humble image of God-like tendencies and behavior, Faith, Love, and Charity, or if you don’t have a dog, then turn you attention to helping other dogs in need in order for you to receive their healing power. This is the path to true healing power of God, thru a Dog.

Healing is not a "dog and pony" show -- it is real.  It comes in different ways and at different times, but we must not limit God because of someone else’s over zealous flamboyant ways "putting down" the dogs.  God desires to heal us. We should not let other religions, “Animal Rights”, or perverted” Animal Laws and religions or their agendas to stifle our personal healing thru the unselfish love, care, and control of our ownership of a dog.

 

Canine comfort that has healing power is my religion

Canine comforts, known in the mental health profession as “therapets,” are providing "wordless" warmth, a brief respite for emotionally bankrupted victims. Dogs do have a healing power, even more than any religion or wealth. Dogs don't ask anything of you. They don't ask you any questions; they don't give you any advice. They are just there for you." It’s very healing to the dog owner.

With the dogs in therapy either personally with your own dog or with a trained therapy dog; for a few minutes you forget your monetary troubles, mental health troubles, illnesses or disease healed.  The dogs provide something that a preacher or religion just can't provide. The healing powers of animals (especially dogs) for troubled people have reduced levels of stress, depression, and even their heart risk. A dog owner finds needed happiness and well-being through this primal connection of caring for the dog.  The reverse spelling of this "word" meets the definition: "Dog" reversed means "God" in my book. Even desperately ill patients respond to this unorthodox but legitimate therapy - a cold wet nose and a furry cuddle of a dog or a puppy means as the power to heal.

Even Cambridge, England, researchers discovered that, within a month of taking a cat or dog into their home, new owners reported a "highly significant" reduction in minor ailments.

The Baker Medical Research Institute in Melbourne, Australia, showed that the health benefits were more far-reaching still. A study of some 6000 patients revealed that those with pets had lower blood pressure, a lower cholesterol level and, as a result, a diminished risk of heart attack. And American researchers have established that, even after a heart attack, dog owners are more likely than other coronary patients to be alive a year later.

The reasons are simple, experts say. Pets (especially dogs) help us reduce our state of arousal, which reduces blood pressure. We are fulfilling our most primitive and basic need - the need to touch.

Dr Yokoyama Akimitsu, head of the psychiatric unit at Kyosai Tachikawa Hospital in Tokyo, says pets can also help us by making us feel less lonely, by creating a feeling of being needed and by encouraging social contact with others interested in animals. They are also a stimulus for healthy exercise, keep us busy and make us feel safe. 

For some people, animals can provide more consistent emotional support than humans. A Warwich University, England, study found that people who are poor at confiding in others, showing love or making friends were able to lavish affection on a pet. 

Whether we pamper our pets or depend on them, few of us would quarrel with the World Health Organization's pronouncement that companion creatures bring us immense benefits. But for some, this comes as a revelation.

 

The healing power of dogs

A famous dog quote but still very true: "There is no psychiatrist in the world like a puppy licking your face."

All pet owners know the health benefits of having pets. It's those that do not own one that still need to be convinced. For thousands of years, humans and dogs have co-existed with each other for mutual benefits. However; for humans, the medical benefits of having a dog around maybe more profound.  In 1962, child psychologist Boris Levinson reported significant improvement in several of his clients when he began bringing his dog Jingles to work with him. The defined the use of the first therapy dog which was Jingles, who accidentally walked into the job due to his master, Dr. Boris Levinson. Dr. Levinson, a psychologist, noticed that he was able to reach a disturbed child when the dog, Jingles, was present. 

I am sure we have "not" all heard it time and time again. Having a pet adds to healing power. When people first get cats, or dogs,they always love having them around, but they could not quite grasp the concept that they are good for their health and why. A dog is truly a man's best friend, in more ways than one. Not only do these furry friends provide companionship and unconditional love, by owning a dog but they also have many positive health benefits. Although most dog lovers have long professed the medical benefits of dog ownership, it has been only a few years since reputable medical associations have studied this canine/human relationship with an eye toward understanding their healing power. 

The Power of Love and Companionship

Using dogs for healing, therapy, companionship, or emotional support is not a new thing in our world. But what has become new is the extent of its popularity and success rates in the United States, Canada, and the world.

What I hope to achieve by this article is to "awaken" people to the power of the “WORD” (DOG) to let each person who reads this article to finally discover the power of the healing power religion of “The Dog.” You may never look at your dog the same way again after reading this article!

 

Now I can finally explain why I don't go to church without my dog

 "When any government, it’s laws, or any church for that matter, undertakes to say to its citizens, church members, or loyal  subjects, the following “WORDS” –  “This you may not read”, or “this you must not see”, or “this you are forbidden to know”, then the end result is “tyranny” and “oppression” no matter how holy the motives or good the intentions are of the government, the law, or the religion in its “execution” of its agenda to care for and control it’s people, and that of its care and control of pets and animals in society, under the perverted legal term called “humane" or "animal health.”

A man or woman who becomes a lover of dogs starts a healing process not equaled by any religion or physician, when their concerns, cares and responsibilities place the dog on the same level as their favorite cherished property or item within their home.  My Meaning, is that he/she will search high and low for that special property that has been lost or misplaced.  But with a dog, there is even more of a spiritual, and now a legal bond more than just a piece of property. A Dog now has a personal, judicial and legal “Intrinsic Value” and can no longer be considered just a piece of meaningless property like “Chattel.”

Once a dog lover always a dog lover, no matter whether the circumstances of his/her “after” life compel him/her to love them from afar. The dog is the better for it and so are the man or the woman, and even the child. My advice is to “buy your son or daughter, or yourself a dog”. 

The dog's "Intrinsic Value" to your lives, cannot be overstated.

 

The “Dog” isn’t the bad guy for being referred to in reverse spelling as “God”- People are.

In summary, regarding my “religion of the dog” statements, I say: Preserve
common sense” in your "Kindness" to all owner's animals, and kindness for each other in society by not 'over-reacting' to dog attacks being promoted in “propaganda” media attacks to obtain 'bad' animal care and control legislation. It's that simple. It will make the world a better place for each of us if we only give our dog's love, teach them kindness for each of us and each other, and give kindness to all animals, with a chance to thrive in preserving dog and pet "Intrinsic Value" in ownership with lawful freedom on our own private property with responsibility. And we need to allow the newly defined “religion of the dog” to take hold in your own home to begin the healing process. God bless our dogs, and their power to heal our troubles and pain.

I Say: “A man's religion is not worth its salt, if his dogs are not the better for it.” AMEN!

###

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

Nebraska Humane Society Executes 400 + cats this year, so far

NationalDogPress © by Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Org. Inc. (Nonprofit)

Nebraska Humane Society Executes 400 + cats this year, so far

2009-11-25 OMAHA, Nebraska (NationalDogPress) --

The Nebraska Humane Society says this year's cat situation is even worse than usual.

The Nebraka Humane Society reports it has too many cats and has been forced to euthanize an alleged substantial amount of the cats in their facility.

Spokeswoman Pam Wiese says the society has killed more than 400 cats so far this year.

She says that every year the society ends up euthanizing "perfectly healthy, adoptable cats, simply because we get too many in,"

Wiese says cats corralled as strays aren't picked up by their owners as routinely as are dogs. More cats are coming in from outside the area, and she says the shelter has even more kittens than usual.

Extra efforts to adopt out the cats have not kept up the number coming in.

The society has signs in its 24-hour drop-off area that tell people any cats they drop off are likely to be euthanized.

The Nebraska Humane Society is alleged to be "far from" any consideration as being noted for any "no -kill" option in their "humane society."

Bottom Line: If you are a cat in the Nebraska Humane Society, the chances are you are "going to be executed."

 · Return to Website ·

© Copyright 2009 NationalDogPress News

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

Coverage under Obamacare require an implantable RFID microchip?

Coverage under Obamacare require an implantable RFID microchip?

There's a pretty starling thing in the bill that 95% of Americans won't like. 

The Obama Health care bill under Class II (Paragraph 1, Section B) specifically includes ‘‘(ii) a class II device that is implantable." Then on page 1004 it describes what the term "data" means in paragraph 1, section B: 

14 ‘‘(B) In this paragraph, the term ‘data’ refers to in15 
formation respecting a device described in paragraph (1), 
16 including claims data, patient survey data, standardized 
17 analytic files that allow for the pooling and analysis of 
18 data from disparate data environments, electronic health 
19 records, and any other data deemed appropriate by the 
20 Secretary" 

What exactly is a class II device that is implantable? Lets see... 

Approved by the FDA, a class II implantable device is a "implantable radiofrequency 
transponder system for patient identification and health information." The purpose of a class II device is to collect data in medical patients such as "claims data, patient survey data, standardized analytic files that allow for the pooling and analysis of data from disparate data environments, electronic health records, and any other data deemed appropriate by the Secretary." 

This sort of device would be implanted in the majority of people who opt to become covered by the public health care option. With the reform of the private insurance companies, who charge outrageous rates, many people will switch their coverage to a more affordable insurance plan. This means the number of people who choose the public option will increase. This also means the number of people chipped will be plentiful as well. The adults who choose to have a chip implanted are the lucky (yes, lucky) ones in this case. Children who are "born in the United States who at the time of birth is not otherwise covered under acceptable coverage" will be qualified and placed into the CHIP or Children's Health Insurance Program (what a convenient name). With a name like CHIP it would seem consistent to have the chip implanted into a child. Children conceived by parents who are already covered under the public option will more than likely be implanted with a chip by the consent of the parent. Eventually everyone will be implanted with a chip. And with the price and coverage of the public option being so competitive with the private companies, the private company may not survive. 

So will everyone be covered by the public option eventually?????? 

And does that mean everyone will be chipped????? 

 

Reference: Here is the Obamacare Text in its raw form:

http://edlabor.house.gov/documents/111/pdf/publications/AAHCA-BillText-071409.pdf

I decided to go research it myself, and it checks out. Note the Items of RFID chipping starting on page 1001 of the bill.

 

WELCOME TO "MARK OF THE BEAST" FOR REAL!

 

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

Obama "Dead Dog Panel" Health Care - O.U.C.H.

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.

 

Copyright © 2006-2009,  Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National

Organization Incorporated (Non-Profit) Iowa 2009, NationalDogPress News, All

Rights Reserved

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