HSUS

Humane Watch puts lawyers in cages

denialism — Sat, 05 May 2012 11:57:43 +0000

Humane Watch puts lawyers in cages

In a brilliant parody of the HSUS shelter ads, humane watch has put sad looking lawyers in cages to emphasize that donations to HSUS do not fund shelters.

HSUS is like PETA but with deodorant and suits. Hah! I love it. HSUS is PETA.

It's upsetting that this fake charity has co-opted the reputation of our local humane societies, used ads depicting suffering animals in cages, then taken in millions of dollars from well meaning people to lobby for animal rights causes. Every time I see their ads I get furious. Less than 1% of their take goes to shelters. HSUS is not a humane society at all, it's an animal rights lobbying group.

denialism Sat, 05/05/2012 - 07:57

Tags

Animal Rights Extremism

Categories

You may be right, but animals can't lobby for themselves. It seems odd to get angry about this when your anger should be directed at the fact that animals still need protecting because they are being abused widely.

If all they did was build shelters but no one tried to address the fundamental issues, and get legislation passed, how would that be better?

Until we live in a perfect world, lawyers will be necessary, and lobby groups, and they will need funds. Its disappointing, but that is the way the very imperfect system we have works.

Hey, that's fine. If you want a group to lobby for animal rights that's your right. But when you show a bunch of sad dogs in cages, suggest that your mission is rescue, put "humane society" in your name, then lobby against caging chickens you're engaged in fraud.

Humane societies have excellent reputations as charities, and many millions of Americans interact with them in any given year, either finding lost pets, adopting, or receiving veterinary care like spaying and neutering of pets. By labeling themselves a "humane society", profiting from that connection, showing dogs and cats in cages to reinforce that connection, then spending the donors money on lobbying against farming practices they are engaged in a deception. I'm willing to bet the overwhelming majority of their donors are not aware that they are not giving to an umbrella organization for shelters, and polling data from the CCF suggests that this is correct, people are confused about the mission of the organization.

The reality is that the mission of HSUS would be distasteful to the majority of Americans, especially those like me that believe animals are necessary for research and agriculture and think pet ownership is ok. This in contradiction to stated goals of HSUS and PETA to eliminate animal agriculture, animal research and pet ownership.

So if you want to give money for animal rights that's your business. What I object to is an animal rights lobbying group that appeals to the emotions of those who love their pets using images of rescue animals while donating virtually nothing to rescue, nothing to shelters, nothing to local humane societies, and instead lobbying for things most pet owners would object to. Like owning pets.

As if they were reading my mind humane watch has released a poll showing 90% of HSUS donors don't realize they're not donating to a humane society.

Just 1 percent of HSUS's donors list "farm animal protection" as their primary reason for supporting the group.
Seventy-four percent of donors give to HSUS to either help pet shelters or reduce the number of animals euthanized each year.
Ninetyâyes, 90âpercent of HSUS's donors were unaware that it gives just 1 percent of its budget to local pet shelters.
Knowing HSUS's non-support of shelters, 80 percent of HSUS's own donors think the group âmisleads people into thinking that it supports local humane societies and pet shelters.â
Nearly 50 percent of HSUS's donors say they are less likely to support the group now that they know HSUS gives so little to local pet shelters.

I'm not from the US, so I'm not really sure how misleading the Humane Society US's materials are, and to the extent they are misleading that's not good and attention should be drawn to that.

But you should know that HumaneWatch is an astroturf organization, an outgrowth of the Center for Consumer Freedom, an industry lobby group (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_Consumer_Freedom). So anything they say should be treated with great skepticism. See http://www.prwatch.org/node/8894.

Also where did you hear that the Humane Society US has stated goals "to eliminate animal agriculture, animal research and pet ownership"? According to their Wikipedia page and their website they explicitly do not oppose either animal agriculture or pet ownership; and to say they're in favour of eliminating animal testing is somewhat misleading, since while that's their end goal, they aim to reach that goal through a gradual replacement, reduction, and refinement of animal testing. (Presumably we'd all be in favour of eliminating animal testing if there were equivalent testing methods which didn't harm animals, no?)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humane_Society_of_the_United_States
http://www.humanesociety.org/issues/biomedical_research/qa/questions_an…
http://www.humanesociety.org/about/policy_statements/statement_farm_ani…

Also as another sign of HumaneWatch's shadiness, I just tried to post a comment to their page that you linked to above ("HSUS is PETA") with a link to the USHS policy page, and a page popped up saying:
"Action Denied: Blacklisted Item Found
http://www.humanesociety.org/about/policy_statements/our_policies_1.html"

I edited my comment to remove the url, but since I pointed out that HumaneWatch is an offshoot of an industry front group (the Center for Consumer Freedom), somehow I doubt it will make it past the moderator...

Oh yeah, I know. They're a front group, largely for restaurant and agriculture operations. However, they damn HSUS and PETA with their own documents and publish the materials online. They're shady, but I happen to think they're making a cogent argument. Especially in regards to HSUS' dishonest ad campaign.

In terms of their interest in eliminating animal research see their own position on animal research:

As do most scientists, The HSUS advocates an end to the use of animals in research and testing that is harmful to the animals.

Umm, guess what. Biological research requires animals to be held captive, given various chemicals, treatments, have their genes rearranged and ultimately killed. Also animals that provide materials like proteins, antibodies, serum, etc., usually harvest/killed in the process either for the explicit purpose of producing reagents or as a bioproduct of slaughterhouses (BSA, FBS). There is no way to perform research in biology without animals or animal products. Pretty much all biologists agree and also see animal rights advocates as threats to biomedical research. So their opening line "As do most scientists" is an outright falsehood. Yes, in the Star Trek future kind of way that we'll all be communists, have free energy and do research on computers, we'd love to not have to deal with the messy work of animal research. Is this going to happen in our lifetimes? In ten lifetimes? Not bloody likely. Currently even the most extensive use of computational power has difficulty figuring out how even small proteins fold, let alone their function in interaction with the tens of thousands of other genes in an organism. In the meantime, I'm going to continue to study biology using animals and animal derived reagents because frankly the idea that alternatives are around the corner is absurd.

In terms of their goals of ending agriculture there are numerous statements from HSUS members, including former ALF terrorists like JP Goodwin, that suggest their lobbying against various forms of agriculture is with the ultimate goal of eliminating animal agriculture. Google away.

Which is now the more widely accepted method of execution. Thanks from http://criminallawyertoronto.com

That video was sadly true. While it's true that animals can't lobby for themselves, the HSUS could have done much better things with their money than to produce costly videos. They are misleading as well. The Humane Society doesn't operate or fund animal shelters. However effective they are at what they do, they can't keep misleading us.

The Truth About HSUS

grrlscientist — Wed, 28 Apr 2010 03:59:56 +0000

The Truth About HSUS

tags: The Truth About HSUS, pets, animals, animal rights, wingnuts, cults, Wayne Pacelle, Humane Society of the United States, HSUS, streaming video

The real agenda of the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) is to remove money from your wallet and put it into their CEOs' retirement funds, to ignore animal shelters, and to forever destroy your ability to live with animals.

grrlscientist Tue, 04/27/2010 - 23:59

Categories

Social Sciences

"This video has been removed by the user."

The Truth About HSUS

grrlscientist — Wed, 21 Apr 2010 04:59:33 +0000

The Truth About HSUS

tags: The Truth About HSUS, pets, animals, animal rights, wingnuts, cults, Wayne Pacelle, Humane Society of the United States, HSUS, streaming video

grrlscientist Wed, 04/21/2010 - 00:59

Categories

Social Sciences

Um Grrrl Whatever you think you are.

People that use the monkier Scientist tend to like to present things that are factual. So aside from this little media presentation where are the numbers facts, etc. from OTHER sources that back this claim.

Those of us that have worked in Science for the last 25 or so plus years are wondering.

Thanks,

katedevil

They're going to "take away our right to own pets"?

Oh, please.

Now, I'm no fan of the HSUS, and I'd appreciate being informed in more detail of the actual problems with this organization. But this silly overwrought agitprop from what appears to be an agricultural organization (with their own anti-spay and neuter - WTF? agenda) ain't helping.

So they're a campaigning body rather than being mainly about sanctuaries. Fair enough - whether or not I agree with particular organisations (and not being American I don't know anything significant about this one), national campaigns are in themselves reasonable things to run.

01jack-- They're going to "take away our right to own pets"?
HSUS (and PETA) both want very much to kill my dog, Arnie (while at the same time, using the misfortunes of his breed to raise money). Im supposed to not care, because if I really loved dogs, I would throw him away and adopt a breed they deem acceptable.

Of course, its really just a blatant ploy to eliminate 'acceptable' breeds, one by one. If you are unable to recognize this obvious trick, I dunno what to tell you. *shrug*

OK, I've done a little looking, and I think the HSUS is something of a fraud, since people contribute to them thinking that they're helping shelters when in fact they are not, and the HSUS is aware of this confusion and does nothing to dispel it.

But as to the rest, killing your dog and all, I was just looking for link or something. A look at the HSUS website shows they they present themselves as against breed specific legislation, though I'm aware that has been some controversy about this but am otherwise uninformed.

Look, I work and volunteer at a shelter (they come to the same thing, I'm afraid) so I oughtn't have to plead my bona fides.

I think there's enough to hang the HSUS on the financials and misrepresentations. I've done a little looking for the facts behind some of the other accusations and haven't found them. It's all conclusory.

I'd just some facts and a link or two. Not a condescending shrug.

HSUS is nothing more than a front for the ALF. They are terrorists.

Being from Canada I just don't *get* the whole culture of lobbying in the US. The problem that I do have with the HSUS is their advertising tactics that lead donors to think that they actually run shelters and directly help needy animals.

Those of you (like "katedevil") who are discounting this video need to get a fricking clue!!! While the HSUS may, on occasion hit upon something that truly does need improving in the animal/pet/agriculture world..... they do so only by blind accident. Their true agenda is insidious and counter to all common sense. Even the "common sense" that many in the scientific/academic community claim to have. HSUS is a fraud and if they got their way there would be no human/animal relationship, interaction or use whatsoever.

I am amazed at how many otherwise reasonably intelligent people are willing to chug down the HSUS Kool-Aid like clueless frat boys at the beer bong. You people need to wise up!

The video, which accuses the HSUS of misleading people because they pursue a legislative agenda and run public awareness campaigns instead of operating shelters, is put out by a group called "Missourians for Animal Care." Must be some concerned pet owners who don't want to lose their poor puppies and kittens to the big bad HSUS, I guess. Some soccer mom must have made this nice home-made amateur video just before taking her kids out for a walk with the family dog. You know, she *cares.*

But actually, "Missourians for Animal Care" is a bunch of big agribusiness corporations:

FCS Financial
MFA Incorporated
Missouri Agribusiness Association
Missouri Cattlemen's Association
Missouri Corn Growers Association
Missouri Dairy Association
Missouri Egg Producers
Missouri Equine Council
Missouri Farm Bureau
Missouri Federation of Animal Owners
Missouri Livestock Marketing Association
Missouri Pet Breeders Association
Missouri Pork Association
Missouri Soybean Association
The Poultry Federation
Professional Pet Association

My conclusions:

1. This astroturf bullshit is more deceptive than anything the HSUS might put out. It's clear that the issue for them is factory farming, not pet ownership. They could give a rat's ass about my dog; they just want to keep their pork and poultry production up with maximum profit.

2. Accusing the HSUS of being misleading because they don't run shelters might be tactically effective, but it's still a bullshit move. It's like saying Clean Water Action is misleading because they advocate for legislation to protect clean water but don't actually run water purification plants. (And,

3. OMG, HSUS provides *pensions* for its employees -- shock and horror!

4. All the negative press I can find about the HSUS originates with bullshit front groups like "Missourians for Animal Care" or Rick Berman's "Center for Consumer Freedom."

5. Nothing on the HSUS site could be called misleading. Even the most cursory look at it tells you they do lobbying and awareness campaigns -- as well as, yes, some support work with local Humane Societies. http://www.humanesociety.org/about/

6. Overall, then, this video is part of an effort to smear a generally mainstream organization by trying to make it look like the ALF. The real message is "Hey, Humane Society, stick to cats and dogs and don't concern yourself with the welfare of animals in meat production! We'll treat and slaughter them however the fuck we want!"

Esteban, please read to better understand.
http://agwired.com/2010/03/01/missourians-for-animal-care-launched/

For the disbelievers, please visit www.hsussucks.com and check out the pages under Articles tab as well as page 9 on the Dept. of Homeland Secuirty page (pages 1 -10 make for a good read and introduction to the seedy world of domestic terrorism masquerading as animal rights activists). HSUS and their affiliates (PeTA, ASPCA, FFA, etc) are also under Federal Investigation by the IRS. As for the Missouri contingency, well, it's about time ag and pet breeders/owners unite to stop these gangsters that also just happen to support terrorism. There is alot happening (crime) the Feds are keeping under wraps as they build the case against HSUS and their "associates". Thank you for your serious consideration.

@wolfdogged: Thanks for the site; I checked it out & it helps clarify things:

The video above is part of a battle over two specific pieces of legislation:

1. "The Puppy Mill Cruelty Prevention Act," which HSUS supports and MAC opposes (text at http://tinyurl.com/2efpubv); and

2. HJR 86, a proposed Missouri constitutional amendment, which MAC supports and HSUS opposes (text of various versions at http://www.senate.mo.gov/10info/house/bills/HJR86.htm).

The HSUS-supported initiative sets out in pretty plain language some requirements for the humane treatment of animals by breeders; the MAC-supported constitutional amendment is an attempt at an end-run around the first. (I think that) the first is a ballot initiative that would be voted on by the public whereas the second is an effort either to limit the impact of the ballot initiative by saying that it couldn't require breeders to actually spend any money if their breeding programs are inhumane or to make a public ballot initiative on humane treatment of animals impossible by saying that such legislation can only be adopted by the legislature.

On the face of it, the puppy mill legislation looks completely unobjectionable to me, and MAC's political tactics seem pretty slimy. In any case, what's certainly clear is that the video above is bullshit propaganda as it relates to the specific legislation at hand. My guess is that actual pet owners (like me), once informed about the actual content of the initiative, would support it & that MAC knows this. As big agribusinesses, they are likely counting on their political contributions to block similar legislation in the legislature if they can get the amendment passed. The video puts MAC's position in the mouth of the "little guy" pet owner and tries to scare pet owners into thinking their pets will be taken away -- a complete mischaracterization of the issue. I note that the Humane Society of Missouri (one of those non-HSUS humane societies) supports the initiative along with the ASPCA, etc. See http://tinyurl.com/36wuwm3

Regardless of how you feel about this legislative battle, it's also clear that it has noting to do with "ecoterrorism" or anything like that.

@ Diane: I checked your site too. It's an anonymously registered site with no information about its producers -- so I'm skeptical about it as a source in the first place. Since they reprint material from Rick Berman's "Center for Consumer Freedom," which is a bullshit front group for the food industry, so I'm not going to take anything there too seriously.

But as far as the specific document you mention, the wikileaked Department of Homeland Security report on "ecoterrorism," please see the following letter of apology from DHS to HSUS for the allegations therein: http://tinyurl.com/29q3q3r

It reads, in part: "In that document, the [HSUS is] inappropriately described as having "known or possible links to ecoterrorism..." This is obviously an erroneous allegation....[T]he [HSUS] and Fund for Animals do *not* have any of the links alleged in this unapproved document...[A]ny existing copies of it are to be immediately destroyed."

The group responsible for this video, Missourians for Animal Care, is opposed to a ballot initiative called the Puppy Mill Cruelty Prevention Act. This initiative would improve standards of care for dogs at Missouri's commercial breeding facilities and would cap the number of intact dogs per facility at fifty. It only covers dogs sold commercially as pets -- no other species of animal -- and includes a specific exemption for hunting dogs, making it clear that this measure would not impact sportsmen or agriculture. There is more information available at missourifordogs.com.

I'd encourage anyone who is interested to read the actual language instead of relying on hearsay. You can view the proposed measure through the Secretary of State's website at http://www.sos.mo.gov/elections/2010petitions/2010-085.asp. Another helpful read is the report recently published by the St. Louis Better Business Bureau regarding puppy mills - http://stlouis.bbb.org/storage/142/documents/Puppy%20Mills%20study.pdf.

Wayne Pacelle and the H$U$ want money and for everyone to become vegan. He is an arrogant LOBBYIST and I for one am sick of the same bills introduced year after year for MSN - get a clue - we are sick of the rhetoric. Wayne should be concerned more about the H$U$ tax exempt status and the Al Capone type RICO charges filed recently - see below...

Racketeering Lawsuit Filed against HSUS and its Lawyers by Feld Entertainment, 16 February 2010
This document is a federal lawsuit filed on February 16, 2010 by Feld Entertainment (the parent company of the Ringling Brothers and Barnum & Bailey Circus) under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act.

Feld is suing:
â¢The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS);
â¢The Fund for Animals (which merged with HSUS in 2004);
â¢Jonathan Lovvorn, an attorney employed by HSUS;
â¢Kimberly Ockene, an attorney employed by HSUS;
â¢The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA);
â¢The Animal Welfare Institute;
â¢The Animal Protection Institute (d/b/a/ Born Free USA);
â¢Tom Rider (a discredited witness in a recently dismissed lawsuit against Feld, who a judge ruled was paid at least $190,000 for his testimony);
â¢Meyer Glitzenstein & Crystal (the outside law firm which handled that lawsuit against Feld);
â¢Katherine Meyer (of Meyer Glitzenstein & Crystal);
â¢Eric Glitzenstein (of Meyer Glitzenstein & Crystal);
â¢Howard Crystal (of Meyer Glitzenstein & Crystal); and
â¢The Wildlife Advocacy Project (a nonprofit organization founded and managed by Meyer Glitzenstein & Crystal, which was used as a pass-through vehicle to allow animal rights groups to pay Tom Rider for his discredited testimony against Feld).

The central claim of the lawsuit (see page 13 of the PDF) is:
[D]efendants have perpetrated and continue to perpetrate multiple schemes to permanently ban Asian elephants in circuses, to defraud FEI of money and property and/or to unjustly enrich themselves, with the ultimate objective of banning Asian elephants in all forms of entertainment and captivity. To carry out these schemes, defendants conspired to conduct and conducted the Enterprise through a pattern of, among other things, bribery and illegal gratuity payments (in violation of both state and federal law), obstruction of justice, mail fraud, wire fraud and money laundering. (emphasis addad)

@ Hilary: thanks!

@ "Carol"

I notice that your name links to humanewatch.org, another Rick Berman front site; for that reason alone, I won't take anything you say seriously; in truth, the fact that Berman is against the HSUS is now pretty much a stamp of approval for it in my book. Whoever you are, you've succeeded in pushing me into the HSUS camp!

To all: It's funny. I'd heard a bunch of these accusations against the HSUS before, and they'd actually worked; I basically had a negative impression of the organization. But for some reason, when I watched this video, it just seemed a little *off,* and I decided I needed to check things out. From my comments above, you can see that it doesn't take much digging to find out that all this anti-HSUS stuff is a bullshit smear campaign by big corporations posing as, you know, "concerned citizens." The fact that no one has responded to the specifics of my comments and that a few trolls are now showing up to post more random accusations against the HSUS just makes me more confident of my conclusions.

For all the HSUS lovers and supporters...you need to broaden your search about HSUS information! There are several books out there that tell the facts. One new book, by Wesley Smith: A Rat Is A Pig Is a Dog Is A Boy, lays out the entire animal rights agenda and how the HSUS and other organizations are creating LAWS to regulate, restrict and prohibit animal ownership and breeding. HSUS and others are spending millions on lobbying for laws and for certain AR friendly legislators. In fact this lobbying has gone so far that the IRS is now investigating the HSUS for FRAUD regarding their non-profit status. Additionally, for those who want the EASY ANSWERS go to www.BewareAnimalRadicals.com and read any of the articles on that site. I know some of the people who wrote their comments and have confirmation from people ON SITE about the HSUS Katrina tom foolery. I have been watching the animal rights orgs work for the past thirty years and they have done their best to change our society into VEGANS. That is the goal...no animal use whatsoever. HSUS CEO Wayne Pacelle stated: "One generation and out. We have no use for domestic animals. They are the result of selective breeding by man." Does that mean these orgs care about wildlife? NOPE. "We have no interest in whether animals become extinct or not." So, there you have it. The HSUS and their AR buddies are NOT PRO ANIMAL!!!! WAKE UP!

In reply to the comments I have been reading here:

katedevil: The financial information comes right from the HSUS tax form 990, which all non-profits are required to file and make public. They can be found on the HSUS site. A quick web search will reveal any other information you may be looking for, often in the original context, so there can be no mistaking the intent of the comments made or the figures quoted.

01jack: That is their intent. It is the major reason they push spay and neuter laws and ordinances. Wayne Pacelle himself is quoted as saying, in part, "One generation and out.", when referencing the end of ownership of animals.

Graham Clark: So, this is why they run those ads to help the animals that convince people they are giving to a national organization that helps local shelters. Most of the monies collected go to lobbying campaigns, which, beyond minor lobbying activities, is banned by law for 501c(3) corporations, which HSUS is.

James Davis: You seem to be going a bit far to claim they are a front for ALF. They neither seem to hinder or help ALF.

Esteban: You cannot kill the message, so you try to kill the messenger. Go, visit the HSUS site. See what they say they do, and then look at what they are really doing. You will find a two faced organization working on one had to keep the money flowing in, while also working to end ALL animal ownership and turn us into a nation of at least vegetarians, if not vegans.

Hillary: You are a shill for HSUS. You know what the end goals of HSUS are. Why not be honest and tell the unsuspecting public to clarify matters for them. Let them know what you do once you get a foot in the door, ever trying to tighten limits imposed by your initiatives you managed to hoodwink the public into passing, the vague and unclear language in California's Proposition 2, leaving the chicken industry out on a limb with many of them seriously considering moving their operations out of state. I really do not know how you and your friend Sarah can sleep at night.

Carol: For the skeptics here, you should probably make it clear that HSUS was not involved in the original filing of the suit, which was done by, I believe, the Fund for Animals, but did become involved after the merger with them.

Esteban: Again you are showing your prejudice in this matter. Do the research again, and this time really do it. You'll find that all the information found on Rick Berman's site, humanewatch.org is based upon fact. There is no need for lying or coloring the case against HSUS. Just ask Hillary, if you can get a straight answer from her. She knows. She works for HSUS.

The information is out there. You will find how HSUS stages stunts they call raids, and sets them up for their advantage. How they swoop in, get the photos and video, and leave local organizations holding the bag while they use the publicity and photos and videos to raise even more money from the unsuspecting public.

Do u all remember the importation act of 92??? That was just the start. Remember 1940'Germany? That was just the start. People never thought it would happen that we could never import birds into the USA, but guess what, it did happen! I know if you jump threw a million hoops and have special permits you can. But the average person can't and won't do that.
I'd like to see them spend ALL THAT MONEY that they say they are using to HELP animals....be REALLY USED TO HELP ANIMALS ! Not for paying big salaries !
I admit I haven't read all of these posts, but I want government and those so called do gooder's OUT OF MY LIFE AND BUSINESS !!

HSUS does not support local humane shelters. HSUS uses Katrina, the Cuban earthquake, a puppy mill story to raise funds for ITS agenda which is 1. pay executive and other employees of HSUS huge salaries. 2. use its funds primarily to promote its legislative agenda 3. its agenda is to stop pet ownership in America 4. destroy animals that are in any kind of relationship with human kind-be it a pet, a farmer or a breeder.

Get a clue, saying it ain't so, because it' so far out. How clueless are you??? Wake up!! As Mulder would say, "the truth is out there."

Thank you Devorah for having the courage to post this.

FYI, the Atlanta Station(which is part of Devorah's video) was pulled off u-tube because HSUS threatened the station with many, many lawsuits, so the station bowed.

It's too bad the station went along with the HSUS, but maybe it wouldn't have changed any minds, because people cannot acknowledge the truth.

Hope you don't like animals because they ARE after your dog, cat, etc. Why do you think there has been an increase in zoning and permit laws concerning animals and pets locally??

Yes, we are losing our freedoms (freedom to see a video about the other side), the freedom to have a pet or breed animals or to be a farmer and raise livestock, ask your neighbor, maybe they've noticed or will tell you the truth!!

@ Laurella Desborough:

Here are a few things to consider, Laurella:

1. If you want to convince me of anything, it is better not to ignore the points I have made. So far, the discussion has gone like this:

Person A: The HSUS is bad because of A, B, & C; see website xxx.com!
Me: [refutes A, B, & C, discredits xxx.com]
Person C: But the HSUS is bad because of D, E, & F; see website yyy.com!
Me: [refutes D, E, & F, discredits yyy.com]
Person D: But the HSUS is bad because of G, H, & I; see website zzz.com.
Me: etc. etc.

Just structurally, this is not a logical argument; it does not refute the points I have made about the dubious sources of anti-HSUS rhetoric and the misleading characterization of specific legislation involved in the posted video. Far from making me think there are other accusations against HSUS I need to investigate, it makes me think there must be no way to refute the conclusions I have drawn, thus making me more secure in them. You should also be aware that the use of random CAPITALIZATION and excessive punctuation makes you sound IRRATIONAL!!!!!!!! Creative orthography does not strengthen a poor argument. It may however be effective as a smear tactic of course -- throw as much shit as you can and see what sticks. As the comments pile up, it is more and more clear that this is what's happening.

For any of GrrlScientist's readers who are still following this -- and for the GrrlScientist herself, I have gone through your "citations":

1. Wesley Smith, author of *A Rat Is A Pig Is a Dog Is A Boy* is a fellow at the Discovery Institute ( discovery.org/p/13 ), an organization that "supports the work of scholars who challenge various aspects of neo-Darwinian theory and scholars who are working on the scientific theory known as intelligent design" ( discovery.org/csc/topQuestions.php ) and doesn't believe in climate change. His book is published by Encounter Books, which seems to specialize in hackjobs of President Obama ( encounterbooks.com/new/ ). I know this is guilt by association, but he does not look like a credible source to me. I will not read his book.

2. The IRS is not investigating the HSUS for fraud. There is a campaign to try to get them to do so. The campaign is headed by Frank Losey, a lobbyist for the Missouri Pet Breeders Assn, which takes us back the legislative fight in that state which I have covered above. (See saova.org/SpayNeuterHSUS.html and bit.ly/ajb6Vz .)

3. I see that BewareAnimalRadicals.com is a campaign site generated by the National Animal Interest Alliance (NAIA), so I checked out NAIA's Board members. ( naiaonline.org/about/board.htm )The first three are:

Tom Albert, Vice President of Government Relations for Feld Entertainment, Inc., parent company of Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey, which has had run-ins with the HSUS over the treatment of elephants.

Lance Baumgard, a Professor at The University of Arizona whose specialty is "improving efficiency of animal production" ( bit.ly/cim6F3 ); and

Sharon Beck, a past president of the Oregon Cattlemen's Association who got caught up in a fight between cattle ranchers wanting to use public land and environmentalists wanting to protect endangered wolves. "We're not raising beef for wolves," she says. "We're raising it for profit." ( spectator.org/archives/2002/03/05/wolves-on-the-loose )

So whatever you want to say about these folks, it's clear to me that they aren't motivated by a love of animals. They are protecting their economic interests. I understand that, of course, but it's dishonest for them to represent themselves as underdog pet owners fighting against terrorist wackos. What their really saying is "Our right to make a profit is more important than some dumb wolf."

@ lynnes honey:

you clearly have not read my comments. I did some careful research and drew some very specific conclusions about the video posted here. I cited my sources. You're right that I dismissed anything produced by or associated with Rick Berman. He is not a "messenger": he is a piece of shit. If any of the claims he makes are legitimate, they should be independently verifiable. If you want to convince me, just engage the specific arguments I've made and cite trustworthy sources.

@ Pat Chinnici:

You are comparing the holocaust to the difficulty of getting permits to sell birds. Get a grip.

Yellow Tail Fail Wines Sucked in by HSUS Scam

grrlscientist — Thu, 04 Mar 2010 05:59:36 +0000

Yellow Tail Fail Wines Sucked in by HSUS Scam

tags: humane society of the united states, HSUS, H$U$, Yellow Tail wine, Casella Wines Pty Ltd, animal rights, animal welfare, animal shelters, Wayne Pacelle streaming video

Yellow Tail wines are produced by Casella Wines Pty Ltd., based in Yenda, Australia. The Casella family produced wine in their native Italy since the 1820s, but moved to Australia to pursue a better life. But Yellow Tail has failed in their goal to pursue the better life in at least one way: they donated $100,000 to the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS). This was a huge mistake, Yellow Tail. If you'd done your homework, you'd know that HSUS is not the same as your local humane societies.

HSUS seeks to abolish animal agriculture -- Mr Casella, what do your clients typically eat while drinking Yellow Tail wines? Steak, perhaps? Fish? Not only that, but Yellow Tail wines fell for the HSUS rhetoric: HSUS scams millions of dollars from the well-meaning public by claiming they use the funds to help animals by funding shelters for them. WRONG. If you check your facts, you'd find that HSUS is a lobbying organization whose CEO, Wayne Pacelle, and his minions pocket millions of dollars annually by perpetuating upon the public the illusion that they actually care for and about animals. But if you examine their 2008 Federal Income Tax return, for example, H$U$ only sends one-half of one percent (0.5%) -- NOT one percent (1.0%) of its annual income -- on actual hands-on animal WELFARE groups (the video below makes a mistake where it claims that 1% goes to local shelters).

HSUS is an enemy of people because it turns a blind eye to Animal Rights terrorists. In fact, HSUS tacitly agrees with AR terrorism by employing people such as homegrown American terrorist, John Goodwin, who is a proud member of Animal Liberation Front (ALF), which is formally recognized as a domestic terrorist threat by the United States Department of Homeland Security.

Don't get me wrong: I am not against agriculture per se. I grew up in a farming and ranching community, so I know first-hand that there is plenty wrong with the practices followed by a diminishing number of people attempting to raise ever-larger numbers of animals for food, but the best way to reduce horrible ranching practices is to (1) have a relationship with a local farmer so you know the practices they follow to raise the meat that you eat and (2) reduce the amount of meat you eat to just one serving per week (or better yet, become a vegetarian). Most Americans and Europeans eat far too much meat and it is this tremendous and growing demand that fuels the battery farming and cruel slaughter practices that put meat on your plates.

Also, don't think that I am endorsing the use of guns, either (I grew up amongst hunters and gun-nuts too, and my experiences with them made me conclude that nearly everyone who possesses a gun shouldn't). However, I am acutely aware that the use of guns in this message makes a rather powerful point, don't you agree?

Further, if you would like to express your dissatisfaction with Yellow Tail wine's stupid fact-checking abilities by no longer purchasing their wines, let me suggest a wonderful American (red) wine instead of Yellow Tail (okay, okay, Yellow Tail finally did reverse their position -- eventually, and only under tremendous pressure). I encourage you to try my favorite American wine label that produces tasty and affordable red wines, Liberty School. I welcome other people's suggestions as well (especially for affordable cabernet and syrah/shiraz wines that I can get in Germany).

NOTE: my wine choice is, like everyone's, based on my own opinions and tastes. I have no connection whatsoever with Liberty School, which is a Californian winery that doesn't even know I exist.

grrlscientist Thu, 03/04/2010 - 00:59

Tags

Casella Wines Pty Ltd

H$U$

HSUS

humane society of the united states

Categories

Veeery interesting!

Plus Yellow Fail Wines are TERIBLE!!! My local wine store was trying to sell them at 2 for $5.00!!! How bad is that???

having bought a few of Yellow Tail's red wines, i agree with you. i also thought they were terrible.

I take it your reference to HSUS `call to abolish animal agriculture' is to document ? Where, in that document, is a call to abolish animal agriculture?

So we're back to linking to the Center for Consumer Freedom to prove how bad the HSUS is again?
When they attack The Center for Science in the Public Interest, are they still a trustworthy organization? Are they trustworthy when they claim trans-fats aren't unhealthy? Was it still trustworthy when they "proved" smoking isn't a health risk?

While I'd agree the HSUS are pretty slimy as a group, the amount of people that supposedly deal in evidence that gleefully take things on faith when they happen to agree with them is kind of staggering.

Hey, that video's pretty funny. And you should always be careful who you let your wallaby hop into bed with - for example, I wouldn't let mine into a menage a troise with the agribusiness industry, "the U.S. Sportsman's Alliance" and industry front group the Center for Consumer Freedom... but ymmv. Since, y'know, that's who behind the Yellow Tail Fail effort . . .

www[dot]ussportsmen[dot]org/Page.aspx?pid=2292
cofarmbureaublog[dot]wordpress[dot]com/2010/02/19/yellowtail-backs-off-hsus-donation/

And of course, there's the current smear campaign against the HSUS being run by the CCF with the support of the agribusiness industry, along with hunting groups, puppy mill owners, etc. - people in the field say it seems to have been HSUS' role in getting California's Proposition 2 passed (it "requires that calves raised for veal, egg-laying hens and pregnant pigs be confined only in ways that allow these animals to lie down, stand up, fully extend their limbs and turn around freely," with "exceptions made for transportation, rodeos, fairs, 4-H programs, law ful slaughter, research and veterinary purposes," and as therefore cuts into the industry's bottom line) that set it off.

But yeah, it is a funny video. Hats off to the "Cob Squad," which if one does their homework (ie, clicks on the obvious link - they're not trying to conceal anything) is part of the Nebraska Corn Board. (Ok, that's kinda cute. Cob Squad!)

If you'd done your homework, you'd know that HSUS is not the same as your local humane societies. "

Absolutely - and it's never claimed to be. The homework here is simply looking at their website! Local humane societies/shelters and rescues are awesome - although I'm biased, as I work in one) and if you're interested in helping out pets in your local area, definitely go ahead and donate! (although it's really best to find out basic stuff about their policies & practices first). The HSUS is a national organization that works to advocate for animals through legislation, education, investigation, etc. (Where did the HSUS spokesperson from the earlier thread go? Can I get them to reimburse me?). This isn't a secret - they go on and on about it.

"HSUS seeks to abolish animal agriculture -- "

As mentioned above, a source would be nice. The film quotes John Goodwin (see below) saying â: HSUS scams millions of dollars from the well-meaning public by claiming they use the funds to help animals by funding shelters for them."

See their About Page humanesociety[dot]horg/about/overview/ and decide for yourself

" If you check your facts, you'd find that HSUS is a lobbying organization
Or just check their webpage, to find that they do indeed focus on legislation!

"Whose CEO, Wayne Pacelle, and his minions pocket millions of dollars annually..."
("Minions"- Awesome!) Interesting. Let's see - if we look at the 2008 tax return (on the HSUS website), we find that Pacelle made $228,981 plus $22,252 in deferred comp & nontaxable benefits, for a total of $252,540. That ain't nothing, to say the least, But giw does it compare with other charities? Well, playing around with charitynavigator[dot]org, we find National Audubon Society pres, John Flicker feathering his nest to the tune of $315,000 (Flicker? You're kidding me, right), ASPCA pres. Edwin Sayres making $446,860 (on '07), American Humane Association pres Marie Wheatley getting $230,000 - that's the (quite respectable and venerable org) praised in a post Orca linked to in comments here a few posts back. Certainly there are others who make less (hey, Ingrid Newkirk only gets $35,462, but that's as PETA pres., so . . . yeah.), but for major national organizations if seems kinda standard. Check out your favorites . . .

(The CCF also goes -vaguely - on about pensions. Yeah, organizations who pay into their employees' 401ks - how evil.)

"... by perpetuating upon the public the illusion that they actually care for and about animals."
Well, - for? - they do have a large sanctuary or two, but not hundreds of shelters - but then again, they don't claim to.

About? Well, again, the whole point of the organization is advocating for animals, and the thing is, while you can certainly disagree with their targets, aims, judgement, procedures, priorities and performance, if you so choose . . .that's what they do. (Charity Navigator's expense breakdown finds 82.7% going to program activities (and about 17% to fundraising and admin).

Have you been reading the comments to your posts, grrlscientist, or clicking on the links at the CCF's anti-humane blog (including one of your posts - congrats!), or just googling around? There's an outpouring of fury towards the HSUS from advocates for hunting, factory farming, puppy mills, etc. (that comment a few posts back angry about "cultural practices" and game birds? They're talking about cockfighting). There are some folks angry for other reasons, sure, but this comes through loud and clear - why do you think there's this whole smear campaign to begin with?! It's not because the HSUS is s all just sitting around eating vegetarian caviar - it's because they spend a ton of time and money making life difficult for folks involved w. puppy mills, factory farming, internet&canned hunting, etc. Now, people can disagree about any aspect of this, and nobody's obliged (or is being forced) to donate; again, if you want to give to your local shelter instead - or also - that's awesome. And the fact that they fight puppy mills and such doesn't mean they don't have other problems. But of course, this is all totally consistent with'caring about animals,' though I'm interested to hear other suggestions. Unsure how you support your contention that they don't care about animals.

"HSUS is an enemy of people because it turns a blind eye to Animal Rights terrorists"

They're supposed to be . . .what? hunting them down? Would it be ok if they just offered rewards for helping catch them? Cause they, like, have.
www[dot]hsus[dot]org/press_and_publications/press_releases/hsus_offers_reward_in_ca_arsons_080408.html

"In fact, HSUS tacitly agrees with AR terrorism by employing people such as homegrown American terrorist, John Goodwin"
"Such as"? Given that despite the constant attempts by the HSUS' enemies to link them to AR terrorism, this is the only name I've seen, I'm not sure we're talking "such as", but rather "by employing John Goodwin" . . .

" who is a proud member of Animal Liberation Front (ALF)"
And since my understanding is that Goodwin describes himself as a former member who now goes on about how that kind of stuff is really bad, and has not been linked to any such activity for years. If you have info to the contrary, there are people who would be very interested to hear about it.

" I know first-hand that there is plenty wrong with the practices followed by a diminishing number of people attempting to raise ever-larger numbers of animals for food"

So you're going to hold your nose and support the Humane Society - or another group fighting to fix factory farming that you're more comfortable with?

" but the best way to reduce horrible ranching practices is to (1) have a relationship with a local farmer so you know the practices they follow to raise the meat that you eat and (2) reduce the amount of meat you eat to just one serving per week (or better yet, become a vegetarian)."

Ah. And this is great important stuff (esp. if you're lucky enough have the location, money and time to do (1)), and I mean, hey, I'm a vegetarian, so I'm like (2) plus! But you know, these sort of individual, voluntary, labor-intensive efforts, as vital as they are, simply can't by themselves solve huge entrenched systematic problems. Would you give this sort of advice to people seeking to improve food safety or reduce child labor/sweatshop practices or fight global warming . . .? Perhaps it's helpful to have big well-funded groups advocating for change, revealing abuses, and supporting legislation? (see Prop 2 above for one very recent example).

Don't you wonder why industry front groups, agribusiness spokespeople and puppymill supporters keep urging you to support your local shelter? I mean, I'm sure some of them are kindhearted folks who care about animals, but of course that has nothing to do with this. The thing is, with a few exceptions, local shelters aren't a threat to them. After all, such places have very limited resources which they need to spend on caring for the endless stream of abused, abandoned, or unwanted animals, perhaps working on local cruelty investigations, etc. It's a incredibly important thing, and again, if you're at all interested, help!

But they can't carry out major investigations, or big educational campaigns, or do much to push the kind of legislation, except maybe on the very local level, that are vital to reducing the kind of horrible practices you talk about - from ranching to puppy mills to 20 other things. If these aren't one's issues or priorities, that's fine, of course, and nobody should be unknowingly supporting them b/c of confusion. Again - local shelters, etc - very cool, and they need your help. But the more kindhearted and concerned people who can be convinced by industry smear campaigns to do only that rather than donating to the HSUS too (or instead), the less they have to worry about getting caught sending downer cows into the food supply, or be prevented from cramming as many breeding female dogs into a facility as they can, or having to give caged chickens a tiny, tiny bit of room to move around, or . . .

These corporate hit jobs against an actual nonprofit are getting old. CCF is a bunch of corporate lobbyists who promote chemicals in food, chemicals in farming, and chemicals in cigarettes.

Oh ma, I should've previewed more carefully! Two quick things:

"As mentioned above, a source would be nice. The film quotes John Goodwin (see below) saying"

should be followed by

"My goal is the total abolition of all animal agricultureâ" - but it's unsourced, and.I haven't been able to find any fuller reference online (through a rather brief and superficial search, to be fair). And of course, Goodwin is the HSUS's dogfighting guy, so it's unclear what this even has to do with anything. "

And "Orca" = "Orac". There's a joke somewhere here about killer whales and alt-med/anti-vax cranks, but I'm too tired to do it . . .

Well, here are some FACTS about HSUS that are, in fact, well documented, though I won't do your Google work for you.
HSUS direct mail advertisements and TV advertisements prominently feature sad looking puppies and kittens and dogs and cats, but HSUS does not fund or support animal shelters with more than one half of one percent of the funds it raises.

It is a repeated practice of HSUS to participate in a dogfighting bust, or a puppymill bust, stick around long enough to stand in front of the TV cameras and newspaper cameras, and then skip town, leaving the local shelters and rescues to care with large numbers of animals which need immediate shelter, medical care, food, personnel to care for them -- none of which the HSUS provides or assists with.

HSUS fundraised HEAVILY to "save" the animals which Katrina left devastated, and then did nothing for those animals until Louisiana raised such a hue and cry that HSUS built an animal hospital with some of those funds.

HSUS fundraised to help the animals devastated by the Haiti earthquake, and then declared that there were no animals there needing their help.

HSUS mounted a major fundraising campaign using the plight of a dog named Faye which had been horribly maimed in dogfighting, when in fact (AT THE TIME OF THE FUNDRAISING) Faye was not in their care, they were not contributing ANYTHING for her care, and the parties caring for her desperately needed financial help to try to save her. ONLY after this was exposed NATIONALLY OVER THE INTERNET did HSUS cough up $5000 towards medical care for Faye. Faye didn't make it. HSUS kept the rest.

HSUS sent representatives to a court in Wilkes County NC just over a year ago to urge the judge to order the death of nearly 150 dogs, many unweaned puppies, which had been seized in a dogfighting bust. Under oath, HSUS representatives (I have the court transcript) told the judge that the dogs could not be rehabilitated, they misrepresented what it would cost to rehabilitated, and they failed to reveal to the judge that there were organizations clamoring to take the dogs in and rehabilitate them at their own expense. The dogs were all killed.

HSUS heavily fundraised to save the dogs from the Michael Vick dogfighting operation, and then argued passionately that they should be killed.

NONE of this is CCF propaganda. It is all fact. Does this sound like a group that an animal lover should send their money to?

Support your local shelters and rescues.

Really? Do your research. Wayne Parcell and minions are also against ownership of companion animals. Agreed,puppy mills ned to be stopped, but how can you seperate HSUS agenda from our companion pets? I WAS A VEGGIE, I now eat meat on a doctors orders. I am down to 25% use of both kidneys and vegie protiens do not do the job. I was supposed to go on dalyisis in May 2008 when it was discovered my kidneys were failing. Its ben almost 3 years now and no needles yet. Any dialysis program says meat protien, not veggies.
Yes,people should do their research, but then HSUS should presents acurate adds when requesting donations, not the bleeding heart crap they do use. Its like smoke and mirrors or bait and switch,all to make the donating public think they are helping shelters. That fact,no one can deny and writing to the contrary makes me think of an HSUS shill.

Wayne Pacelle and his damage control staff keep citing their high ratings from Charity Navigator and Worth in order to change the subject and divert attention from the ugly truths Humane Watch is sharing with the public. Its like Bernie Madoff defending himself by arguing that the SEC found no wrongdoing in its investigations of his company. Charity Navigator is more of a lapdog than a watchdog because it bases half of its rating on "financial health" (HSUS is in incredible wealth) and does no checking or "calculations" when rating efficiency. If Pacelle tells the accountants to claim 85% is spent on programs, they will do so and Charity Navigator will plug the number into their formula and move on to the next of 7000+ charities they rate each year. Worth Magazine is a shadow of its former self in terms of staff and revenue. In late 2002, they did a six month investigation to determine the 100 best charities and ten worst. HSUS was one of the ten, alongside some really sleazy sham charities, some of whom also cook their books and earn four stars from Charity Navigator. Worth used the far more respected American Institute of Philanthropy and Attorney Generals offices and public records in their research. In 2002, AIP gave HSUS a D, its current grade is a C minus. Worth Magazine changed formats in 2003 and is barely hanging on. Their list of fiscally responsible charities was thrown together by a non-expert who relied on Charity Navigator and HSUS press releases as their major sources. I'm sure they realize they screwed up and I doubt they want to be used as a character witness for a corrupt charity everytime they are exposed (which is every day). Maybe they should be alerted.

HSUS may put a disclaimer on their website about their role with shelters (even that is misleading) but their target audience (the gullible) that they prey on via endless mailings, "free" gifts, TV ads and begging phone calls,
are most definitely deceived.

John Goodwin's sick ranting can be found by googling "J.P. Goodwin No Compromise Magazine". The fact that Pacelle not only hired and promoted him but had him sign the disgraceful "Faye" fundraising scam letter sends a clear message: We don't care what you think, we will do whatever we want. If we are exposed and condemned (mainly by the legitimate animal welfare community, not just Humanewatch), we will just increase the deception, expand the fundraising and sue the whistleblowers.
Pacelle and the HSUS are a disgrace.

Science blog??? You don't follow through with your research. None of your posts have credible sources! I bet you believe the global climate change deniers too. (BTW, did you hear that man and dinosaurs roamed the earth together? It's in the bible!)

The Humane Society of the United States Does NOT Care For (or About) Animals

grrlscientist — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 05:59:19 +0000

The Humane Society of the United States Does NOT Care For (or About) Animals

tags: humane society of the united states, HSUS, H$U$, news report, investigative journalism, animal rights, animal welfare, animal shelters, Wayne Pacelle streaming video

Let me remind you that, if you care about animals, you do NOT want to support the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS, more typically known as H$U$). This organization sucked up millions of dollars donated by people from around the world, claiming they would help save animals affected by Hurricane Katrina, but almost none of those funds went to save any animals at all. Who was the most helpful in saving animals? Members of the American military!

grrlscientist Wed, 03/03/2010 - 00:59

Tags

humane society of the united states

investigative journalism

Categories

One of my local colleagues is the social media maven for HSUS. Need to do some soul searching on this one, I think.

Their 'dog fighting expert' is some uneducated 'former' Animal Liberation Front member.

He wants to kill my dog.

Go figure.

btw-- After every HSUS post I have on my blag, some HSUS flunky comes by to leave some generic positive PR message. Wanna see if they find yours. hehehehe *waits behind the bushes*

Oh, they already have, ERV. Check out the last few day's HSUS posts.

You mean my aunts dog could've been saved if not for those bastards? That little dog was the highlight of her tough life, it was a real bummer when he went missing. I hope some good samaritan found him and gave him a good home, he was a sweet little yapper.

Very eye-opening. Thanks for posting. Curious what you make of this? http://www.humanesociety.org/news/news/2010/01/hsus_worth_the_investmen…
If they are fiscally irresponsible why do they receive press like this? Just trying to get to the bottom of this issue which seems, for me at least, to have a lot of grey area.

How did Worth magazine decide on their top 10? I can't see any details in the article that HSUS link to.

Leigh--speaking as someone who works in non-profits, "fiscally responsible" is not the same as "accomplishing their mission." In fact often the two are opposing goods that organizations must carefully balance. The most fiscally responsible thing a non-profit organization can do is sink 100% of their sustaining contributions into fundraising/PR and administration and make occasional special fundraising appeals for specific mission-related goals in order to stay on people's radar. Most non-profits risk a little more to accomplish a little more, and many fall apart trying--but having an unstable financial portfolio and doing as much as you can on a shoestring budget is not what gets you into Worth magazine as a top performer, interestingly. Nonprofits all know that the majority of people give to the appearance of success, not to need, and companies that serve the non-profit and philanthropy community follow this rule as much as your average donor.

That's my perspective, anyway; hope it helps.

Thanks, Kerrick. It does clarify a bit. Can you or anyone relate that to the specifics of the fiscal problem with HSUS? I just find it hard to believe these are just simply bad and greedy people out to get our money. It would make more sense to me if it were a mismanaged organization. At any rate, I hope this debate becomes more public so the lack of integrity can be exposed to the light of day and resolved. Thanks to all for helping inform.

I found that little movie very eye opening. I never realized that the HSUS did SFA during the Katrina Disaster except raise money. I have a friend that lives in Baton Rouge and during the weeks after the storm she would go to the dog "holding' areas and volunteer to walk and exercise the dogs.To this day it still bothers her to think about what happened to the people AND the animals.

BTW, I just discovered your blog today & I think it's great! You have a new reader!

The Greed of The Humane Society of the United States

grrlscientist — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 05:59:16 +0000

The Greed of The Humane Society of the United States

tags: humane society of the united states, HSUS, H$U$, news report, investigative journalism, animal rights, animal welfare, animal shelters, streaming video

Where do all those millions of dollars of charitable donations to the Humane Society of the United States go? If you think H$U$ uses those monies to help improve the lives of animals, think again!

Seven Things You Didn't Know About the Humane Society of the United States:

The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) is a "humane society" in name only, since it doesn't operate a single pet shelter or pet adoption facility anywhere in the United States. During 2007, HSUS contributed only 3.64 percent of its budget to organizations that operate hands-on dog and cat shelters. In reality, HSUS is a wealthy animal-rights lobbying organization (the largest and richest on earth) that agitates for the same goals as PETA and other radical groups.
Beginning on the day of NFL quarterback Michael Vick's 2007 dogfighting indictment, HSUS raised money online with the false promise that it would "care for the dogs seized in the Michael Vick case." The New York Times later reported that HSUS wasn't caring for Vick's dogs at all. And HSUS president Wayne Pacelle told the Times that his group recommended that government officials "put down" (that is, kill) the dogs rather than adopt them out to suitable homes. HSUS later quietly altered its Internet fundraising pitch.
HSUS's senior management includes a former spokesman for the Animal Liberation Front (ALF), a criminal group designated as "terrorists" by the FBI. HSUS president Wayne Pacelle hired John "J.P." Goodwin in 1997, the same year Goodwin described himself as "spokesperson for the ALF" while he fielded media calls in the wake of an ALF arson attack at a California veal processing plant. In 1997, when asked by reporters for a reaction to an ALF arson fire at a farmer's feed co-op in Utah (which nearly killed a family sleeping on the premises), Goodwin replied, "We're ecstatic." That same year, Goodwin was arrested at a UC Davis protest celebrating the 10-year anniversary of an ALF arson at the university that caused $5 million in damage. And in 1998, Goodwin described himself publicly as a "former member of ALF."
According to a 2008 Los Angeles Times investigation, less than 12 percent of money raised for HSUS by California telemarketers actually ends up in HSUS's bank account. The rest is kept by professional fundraisers. And if you exclude two campaigns run for HSUS by the "Build-a-Bear Workshop" retail chain, which consisted of the sale of surplus stuffed animals (not really "fundraising"), HSUS's yield number shrinks to just 3 percent. Sadly, this appears typical. In 2004, HSUS ran a telemarketing campaign in Connecticut with fundraisers who promised to return a minimum of zero percent of the proceeds. The campaign raised over $1.4 million. Not only did absolutely none of that money go to HSUS, but the group paid $175,000 for the telemarketing work.
Research shows that HSUS's heavily promoted U.S. "boycott" of Canadian seafood -- announced in 2005 as a protest against Canada's annual seal hunt--is a phony exercise in media manipulation. A 2006 investigation found that 78 percent of the restaurants and seafood distributors described by HSUS as "boycotters" weren't participating at all. Nearly two-thirds of them told surveyors they were completely unaware HSUS was using their names in connection with an international boycott campaign. Canada's federal government is on record about this deception, saying: "Some animal rights groups have been misleading the public for years ... it's no surprise at all that the richest of them would mislead the public with a phony seafood boycott."
HSUS raised a reported $34 million in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, supposedly to help reunite lost pets with their owners. But comparatively little of that money was spent for its intended purpose. Louisiana's Attorney General shuttered his 18-month-long investigation into where most of these millions went, shortly after HSUS announced its plan to contribute $600,000 toward the construction of an animal shelter on the grounds of a state prison. Public disclosures of the disposition of the $34 million in Katrina-related donations add up to less than $7 million.
After gathering undercover video footage of improper animal handling at a Chino, CA slaughterhouse during November of 2007, HSUS sat on its video evidence for three months, even refusing to share it with the U.S. Department of Agriculture. HSUS's Dr. Michael Greger testified before Congress that the San Bernardino County (CA) District Attorney's office asked the group "to hold on to the information while they completed their investigation." But the District Attorney's office quickly denied that account, even declaring that HSUS refused to make its undercover spy available to investigators if the USDA were present at those meetings. Ultimately, HSUS chose to release its video footage at a more politically opportune time, as it prepared to launch a livestock-related ballot campaign in California. Meanwhile, meat from the slaughterhouse continued to flow into the U.S. food supply for months.

Source: The Center for Consumer Freedom.

grrlscientist Tue, 03/02/2010 - 00:59

Tags

humane society of the united states

investigative journalism

Categories

Response to CCFâs â7 Things You Didnât Know About HSUSâ: http://www.hsus.org/response_to_ccfs_7_things.html

(source: the HSUS, obviously)

I find this extremely interesting:

"Rick Berman, executive director of CCF, admitted as much. He wrote after The HSUS successfully pushed for the passage of Proposition 2, a landmark ballot initiative to halt the confinement of animals on factory farms:

âWith the passage of Californiaâs Proposition 2, more people have come to realize the evolving threat of the power, influence, and growing wealth of the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS). Ballot initiatives and legislation similar to Prop. 2 will soon be introduced in more states. HSUSâs massive budget, unwarranted positive public reputation, and deep-pocketed Hollywood friends will only become a greater threat to industry in a post-Proposition 2 business environment. It is crucial that a key broad cross-section of agriculture leaders start managing this nationwide threat now, before it is too late or too expensive to match HSUS dollar for dollar.â

CCF vs HSUS round 273;-)

You know I've been watching the CCF versus HSUS and PeTA debates for almost a decade now and have come to a couple of conclusions.

Pretty much every allegation HSUS makes about CCF is true.

Pretty much every allegation CCF makes against HSUS (and PeTA) is also true.

So after 10 years I guess all I can say is "A plague on both your houses!"

I wish both sides would provide more links to back up their claims. Although it is amusing to see the HSUS approvingly quote someone saying that they're mainly a political organization.

@Liam -- Glad it's not just me. I'm so uncomfortable with the CCF & Berman et al. that I don't even like to cite their info when I agree with it (which I generally do re HSUS & PETA). But I guess even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

Perhaps we should ask Mr. Vick to stage a caged fight between the leaders of both groups.

Given that the Center for Consumer Freedom is heavily funded by Philip Morris (sorry, "Altria"), Tyson Foods, Pilgrim's Pride, Monsanto, and Wendy's, among others, (according to Wikipedia),I find their advocacy suspect, to say the least.

They seem to be just a front for the food, tobacco, chemical and firearms industries.

I'm not defending HSUS, being more an ASPCA fan, but really, I don't see the Center for Consumer Freedom as a very reliable source for information. Just sayin'.

But documents don't lie. Check out www.humanewatch.org for factual information. Yes, it's sponsored by CCF and you may not like the blogger's style, but they have links to the documentation for everything. Study the proof and then decide.

@ Dan S. No 1: Here we go again with Prop. 2. The only valid argument against Prop. 2 is that the extra cage space may have little or no impact on the quality of life of hens who are de-beaked and deprived of natural light for entirety of their lives. All of the other crap about "free-range" is the work of spin doctors who were counting on illiteracy and laziness of voters. The campaign both for and against Prop. 2 made me ill. Fluffy white chickens as a result of Prop. 2? Hell, no. I voted for the chance of a marginally more ethical egg.

This is total trash. The CCF? Good Lord, they're as bad as Freedom's Watch or PNAC for crying out loud. Any other corporate neo-conservative propaganda you feel like posting?

Thanks for spreading the word on this! I'm in Toronto where the Humane Society's shelter was shut down briefly and several of the people running it were charged with Animal Cruelty! The problem isn't isolated to the US (I doubt that makes you feel any better though!).

I've never been a fan of the HSUS and especially am not after their pimping of their new vegan dog food. I wrote quite a ranty blog post & you can read it here http://www.doggiestylish.com/store/2010/02/the-humane-society-gets-the-…

I didn't realize that they don't own and operate any animal shelters. I just assumed that since they are championing animal rights, they must care for them, too. How odd. I think that the best thing that a person can do is to support a legitimate local animal shelter.

As for the Canadian seafood boycott. I'm Canadian and this is the frist time that I've heard about this

I find it interesting that when Michael O'sullivan, a career shelter operator, was hired to run the Humane Society of Canada he eventually removed the HSUS from the board. It was an organisation started by the HSUS. What philisophical difference do you suppose could have caused this schism.

The Humane Society Of The United States (HSUS) Scams Millions Of Dollars Each Year

grrlscientist — Mon, 01 Mar 2010 05:59:29 +0000

The Humane Society Of The United States (HSUS) Scams Millions Of Dollars Each Year

tags: humane society of the united states, HSUS, H$U$, news report, investigative journalism, animal rights, animal welfare, animal shelters, streaming video

This investigative news report documents what we've always known: the Humane Society of the United States is nothing more than a fat, bloated charade of "animal lovers" who want everyone to lose our pets along any relationship with animals that we might have, whether they are companions, partners, teachers or the source of information or food. Contrary to their claims, HSUS does not support local animal shelters, does not help provide homes to homeless animals, and advocates that no human shall ever breed animals for any reason, whether it's for medical or scientific research, for conservation purposes, for educational purposes, for food or for companionship.

grrlscientist Mon, 03/01/2010 - 00:59

Tags

humane society of the united states

investigative journalism

Categories

This bums me out.
So if you really want to donate to a cause that directly benefits animals, give to your local shelter.
What about ASPCA? Are there any good guys?
It's not like the animals can speak out about this public deception.

indeed, do donate to your local shelter. since you live close to your local shelter, it is likely that you can keep a closer eye on their doings, and you probably personally know someone who works or volunteers there, too.

I work at the HSUS, and wanted to clarify a few things. First, the WSB report uses the Center for Consumer Freedom as their source, which is nothing more than a front group for big industry. It started with a 600k grant from Philip Morris, and has attacked groups such as the CDC and Mothers Against Drunk Driving to name a few.

That being said, the HSUS has been given great ratings by charity watchdogs like Charity Navigator and the Better Business Bureau, as well as being ranked among the top ten most fiscally responsible charities. As for Katrina, we actually have accounting available on our website for the generous donations we received. Highlights include $7.3 million for direct response, rescue and reunion efforts; $8.35 million in recovery and reconstruction grants to 45 Gulf Coast humane organizations; $2.3 million in reimbursement grants to 130 cooperating organizations from 29 other states; $3.8 million to support pet health and overpopulation initiatives; $600,000 on the construction of an emergency shelter; $600,000 on legislation to ensure the inclusion of animals in disaster planning; and $2 million for a public education campaign on spaying and neutering. (you can see full accounting here.)

Having worked at a shelter, I understand that we all want to see immediate results, and save the dog or cat we see in that kennel. However the HSUS purpose is not to run or fund your local shelter, nor does it claim to be. Our mission is clear, we are there to protect animals by focusing on a wide range of issues. Issues ranging from the most egregious forms of hunting such as internet and canned hunts, working to end the inhumane treatment of farm animals on factory farms, shutting down puppy mills and animal fighting rings. Anyone with a question of what we do can look at our website and see our work, and what we do on a daily basis. I recommend that people visit our website and Wayne's blog (waynepacelle.com) and see what we are really about.

The ASPCA does indeed support and shelter animals and does indeed help communities nationwide to create humane practices and spay/neuter programs.

I really hope your post is snark.

If not, if you can find this video on the station's website ,
you might want to post the link. Wikipedia's
HSUS page, in the first paragraph under `Criticism', says that the station removed the
story "from its website after the HSUS pointed out a number of errors." The critic in the videotape is from the Center for Consumer Freedom, whose MediaWatch page is here .

Oh, this is nothing! What about the $ierra Club?! After all, they scam millions of dollars a year too, taking donors' money and being all activisty, using it for stuff like lobbying for environmental legislation and fighting global warming!! instead of focusing mainly on cleaning up streams in my local area! (to say nothing of how they're completely uninvolved in trail construction and day-to-day conservation work in the Sierra Nevadas!) Sure, these ideas about what they're falsely claiming to do are partly just in my head, and it would only take a brief glance of their website to set me straight, but who has time to do the most basic due dillagence before donating to charity?* For shame, $ierra Club, for shame!

* Actually, I have a lot of sympathy for that - heck, I've done it - and I wouldn't apply it to folks who don't have much in the way of online access (or knowledge/comfort). But, well . . .

And to be fair, the HSUS situation is slightly muddier, because local "Sierra Clubs" are affiliated with the national group, while local humane societies aren't, and for folks who aren't familiar with the field or history of animal welfare, I guess it apparently is kind of confusing. ("Humane society" is (also) a general category or label for organizations that, as Wikipedia puts it, " aims to stop human or animal suffering due to cruelty or other reasons" ('the HSUS doesn't help people in need! What a scam!!'), so when they picked the name back in '51, it made a lot of sense).

Look, I work in a small local shelter, and while the HSUS isn't perfect, this is largely nonsense - little bits of actual truth mixed in big globs of half-truths all drowning in a big sticky mess of misdirection and manipulation.

On the other hand (as you can guess from above)- yes, if you want to help pets and other animals in your local area, yes, yes, yes, definitely donate to your local shelter. (Please!) (Although - esp. if you're not familiar with sheltering and animal welfare - you should find out what their basic policies, etc. are before donating.)

And if you want to help with broader national campaigns against stuff like puppy mills, factory farming, canned hunting, etc., etc., well, maybe you want to donate to the HSUS. Depending on your beliefs and positions and view of the various CCF accusations, maybe you don't. That's fine. Research, and judge for yourself. Just keep in mind who's saying what, and why, and vitally, how strong the evidence is once you look past the rhetoric. (Which goes both ways, of course).

And of course, if one wants to point out that the HSUS is not just a big animal shelter or parent org for the local humane societies, that's great! I know we certainly wouldn't want folks donating to us by mistake b/c they thought we were something other than we are - and in fact, in cases when it became clear that's what was happening, we've let them know, because that's just sucky otherwise. But I'd hope folks will poke around on, for example, the HSUS' web page first
http://www.humanesociety.org/
see what claims they make, information they give, and activities they highlight, and then decide whether this seems a case of horrible evil greedy deception, or an organization perhaps not doing everything it possibly could to dispel some misconceptions, but..., or more along the lines of innocent misunderstandings, or . . .

(And who's that cheerful face we see in the 'expose'? Is that David Martosko of the CCF/HumaneWatch? Why yes it is! Hi, David! This must be a fun break from attacking MADD and the FDA, no?

Interesting to see the major defense is an attack on CCF rather than a good response to the charges. The question is whether the charges are valid or not, regardless of who* is making them.

After all, the question is not so much what stuff HSUS buries on its website but more what people *think* they are giving to when they receive a solicitation. And I can tell you there are boatloads of people that I talk to that do not understand *at all* that the HSUS is not putting the vast majority of charitable donations back into local shelter operations. I wonder if the relative percentages devoted to various parts of their operation are detailed anywhere on the solicitation literature?

*because HSUS and other public face of ARA terrorism flacks sure get amped up whenever anyone questions their motivations because of their associations, I can tell you.

It is unfortunate that many well meaning animal lovers have been fooled by the HSUS propaganda...showing pitiful dogs and cats and asking for donations. How much does the HSUS donate to the care of dogs and cats? Less than one cent per dollar donated. How can one confirm this? Simply check out the tax filings at the IRS. They have to list how their donations are spent, and it is all there.

In terms of local shelters, HSUS helps them...how? By doing an analysis of their functions...and CHARGING them for that! So, it isn't for free. Check with your local shelter for this information.

How does the HSUS help animals? By promoting laws against their keeping, their breeding and their use, whether for pets or for food. Why do we have all these laws against owning more than 2 per 3 pets per household? Why do we have state and local laws mandating the spaying and neutering of all dogs and cats, with extremely high fees for any exemptions? Why do we have national laws promoted to eliminate all exotic pets as invasive species? All these laws have been crafted with the help of the HSUS, to further their agenda of NO ANIMALS. No pets, no poultry, no circuses, no rodeos, no hunting, and no medical research.

For those with exotic birds, the HSUS SUED the USFWS to force them to change the regulations under the WBCA to treat CITES Appendix III birds just as the WBCA mandated the treatment of CITES Appendix II birds. This is one of the ways the HSUS spends donation dollars, in lawsuits against the US federal agencies to force them to move further with regulations than the Congress has mandated by the specific law passed.

The HSUS also provides funds to legislators, sometimes straight away, sometimes through another organization, in order to promote legislators who will work for their agenda of no animal use. They also actively work against the re-election of legislators who did not support their agenda. For instance, Congressman Pombo in California lost his bid for re-election due to the billboards, news releases, and other activities of the HSUS to stop his re-election.

The urban and sub-urban dwellers who have no connection with animal husbandry in any of its forms are quite willing to believe whatever propaganda that is put forward by the HSUS regarding animal uses. Thus, these folks vote for changes in animal care that are detrimental to the general public, such as the recent Proposition 2 in California or the Pig Amendment in Florida. As a result, there are no more pork producers in Florida and the poultry producers are preparing to shut down or leave California.

Additionally, in Florida some individuals worked to establish a special license plate which would have made some money for assisting with spay and neuter funds for the public to use for their animals. The HSUS intervened in the legislative process, adding sections to the bill which would have established a special "animals committee" and established a special location for that committee, of course, including the HSUS as a party to it, and all to be paid for by these special fees. The original folks working on this special license were outraged by the hubris of the HSUS folks interjecting their agenda into what would have been funds strictly for spay and neuter. This is one reason many animal lovers do not sponsor legislation. Just as soon as they put forward a positive bill for animals, the HSUS gets into the picture and tries to interject their agenda, which is antithetical to the animals interests.

One needs to note that the "true believers" in the HSUS will deny all factual data, such as that put forward in the new website: www.humanewatch.com even though the HSUS papers filed to the IRS have been posted on the website!
When you do the math, very few donated dollars end up helping any animals. They sure do help the HSUS folks though, with nice retirement funds and a great assist in lobbying and campaigning for more donated dollars.

What is really laughable is that the HSUS supporters always accuse animal owners and users of being GREEDY... guess they are pretty hung up on money issues...because this greed complaint would be more accurate if attributed to the HSUS. The facts are in the IRS tax filings.

Thankfully, I am seeing more animal lovers waking up and stopping their support of the HSUS, an organization that is working to remove animals from humans. The HSUS agenda goes against every ideal of freedom of choice that this nation was found upon. For further information see: www.exposeanimalrights.com

Sarah, you might want to look for a new employer so you don't drown with the rats on that sinking ship.

Is it true you have to be vegan to work there? Discrimination, isn't it????

But, that's where the control of Ole King Wayne kicks in. He'll be telling everyone what to eat, how many toilet paper sheets to use and will virtually drive pets into extinction and cause great starvation with his imbicilic "ideas".
The Vegan Diet=

NO MEAT = NO FERTILIZER = NO CROPS = NO FOOD.
Wow, I guess he really wants to put an end to mankind?

And, I am sure he has his eye on running for office himself - it will be a cold day in hell.

Oh, and I have never seen anyone look a out of their element as Wayne holding an animal. He has the warmth of a crockodile and is a FAKE! That phony smile - I'm amazed your PR guys let those photos through.

Oh, one more thing - Infiltrating religion???? WTF. You guys are terrorists posing as brown shirts posing as animal lovers. Hitler started animal rights in Germany - no one would defend someone accused of animal abuse, right?

please take your organization to China or Afghanistan - anywhere else - just leave my country alone.

I will dance in the street - and so will my animals that have escaped your claws - the day the RICO verdict and fines are delivered.

Sarah, honey, where there is smoke there is fire. As close as you are, you should smell it by now.

I work at the HSUS, and wanted to clarify a few things. First, the WSB report uses the Center for Consumer Freedom as their source, which is nothing more than a front group for big industry. It started with a 600k grant from Philip Morris, and has attacked groups such as the CDC and Mothers Against Drunk Driving to name a few.

Is it or is it not true that the HSUS is affiliated with PETA and other animal rights extremists?

http://austringer.net/wp/index.php/2007/08/01/humane-societies-telling-…

http://scienceblogs.com/digitalbio/2008/08/book_review_the_animal_resea…

Orac,
Neither of those links is any help at all. Austringer points out that HSUS and AHS are two separate groups. Okay. The DBDW link leads to a shouting match with no results. Can anyone point to information from a neutral source that directly ties HSUS the more dangerous animal rights groups like ALF (an accusation brought up in the DBDW thread) or Negotiation is Over. By neutral, I mean someone without a financial stake in opposing HSUS: not from one of Berman's astroturf groups, like HumaneWatch or ActivistCash, or from Fels Entertainment or any of the other clients who pay Berman. I'm serious. I see lots of smears and accusations floating around, but little real information.

Can anyone point to information from a neutral source that directly ties HSUS the more dangerous animal rights groups like ALF (an accusation brought up in the DBDW thread) or Negotiation is Over.

The HSUS's manager of animal fighting issues is, apparently, a former member of ALF (Wikipedia states that these are the same person: I would link but I might end up in moderation).

Regarding HSUS's relationship to PETA and to animal rights domestic terrorists...check out the name John Goodwin. He is one of the activists who has been in trouble with the law and now he works for HSUS.

For those who would like a lot of detailed information, you might order the inexpensive book "Animal Rights: The Inhumane Crusade" by Daniel Oliver. This book lists all the major animal rights organizations, their agenda, their fundraising, their activities, and how they are affecting our society. There are also other books out there.

Folks are concerned about Consumer Freedom website and its owner and his agenda. There are many many individuals and organizations that are very concerned about the activities and agenda of the HSUS who have NO relationship to CF and who are not funded by any business or corporation. Many are individual pet owners who have become aware of what the HSUS is doing.

The HSUS activities during Katrina awakened many dog and pet owners when they saw HSUS staffers going for photo ops while others did the dirty work of collecting and cleaning up the animals. Then the Louisiana state attorney went after HSUS because of all their fundraising for Katrina animals and because HSUS had not donated one thin dime to any animal activities in that state. Then HSUS spent a small portion of their collected millions and built ONE animal shelter in Louisiana!!!

Veterinarian volunteers, pet owners, animal rescuers and dog breeders traveled to New Orleans to help take care of the animals. Their reports on the activities of HSUS are shocking as most report the real work was done by many individuals volunteering, not by the HSUS staffers.

@Laura No. 1: ASPCA does have a richer history, but they are now largely a lobby group, and representative democracy just chips away at real democracy. I am with Grrl on sponsoring your local SPCA or shelter/clinic rather.

@DrugMonkey No. 7: I actually support the intentions of CCF, but they really are not a credible source. David Martosko has no business serving as a director of any kind of "research." He has a bit of history of making shit up, and this only damages the cause.

After all, the question is not so much what stuff HSUS buries on its website "

That's true, because I'm not talking about what stuff HSUS buries on its website, but the stuff it puts on the front page, and one to two clicks in under clear, obvious headings.

"And I can tell you there are boatloads of people that I talk to that do not understand *at all* that the HSUS is not putting the vast majority of charitable donations back into local shelter operations. i"

That's genuinely unfortunate. As I mentioned above, I think part of the problem is that lots of people - not unreasonably, to be fair - take "humane society" to be a simple name, a trademark, almost, not realizing it's actually a category. . The ASPCA and local SPCAs are in a somewhat similar situation - they're all independent of each other. The ASPCA does have more in common with the SPCAs compared to the HS situation , but it does to a lot of lobbying and education big campaigns - because that's its job.

I do have to wonder - what connection do the boatloads of people you mention generally have to the HSUS? Are they generally supporters/donors? Have they ever stopped by the website? Perused its literature? Etc. etc.

If the HSUS is aware of the confusion, why doesn't it change its name to something clearer?

The Humane Society of the US is a deviant, unethical and unregulated society of social misfits and misinformed idiots.

They care about putting money in their pocket and building financial empires for themselves. If you care to see what kind of humble abode one of their Sr. VP resides in while staying in Washington DC, take a look at 4702 Warren St NW. Bear in mind that this is the good DOCTORâs second home and not a primary residence. You know, just a place to rest your head when in town.

So Sarah (HSUS employee) wants us to read the fox's blog about hen house matters. Really? Would that be the same Wayne Pacelle that publicly praised the saving of the Michael Vick dogs while lobbying to have them all killed without the nicety of a behavioral evaluations. We all know how wrong Wayne was there, don't we.

HSUS is intentionally misleading the public by making dramatic domestic animal seizures and then blowing town once the cameras are turned off, leaving locals to clean up the mess, rehabilitate and feed the animals and foot the bill. The HSUS has come out against "the most egregious" forms of hunting - which in HSUS speak is ALL hunting. They are working to end "the inhumane treatment of farm animals" by creating legislation to make the standards to own those animals impractical/expensive/not economically viable. The HSUS is "shutting down puppy mills" by demonizing the practice of breeding dogs by anyone for any reason and stopping animal fighting by making owning certain breeds of dogs illegal and excusing the practice of killing within hours of seizure. Thousands of dogs with loving homes and without an aggressive bone in their bodies, who have never hurt a fly, are killed every year thanks to HSUS-supported breed specific legislation.

But as Sarah suggested, anyone with a question of what HSUS does can look at their website. It's fox guarding the hen house.com (insert eye roll icon here).

don't believe it?

pick up a phone and call every animal shelter within a 100 mile radius of your home. ask them how much money they got in the last year, last two years,last ten years, from HSUS.
now try 200 miles. three hundred. five.

do your own research and discover the truth. I did.

but they will keep pushing those ads on tv and sending out mailers about shelter pets, won't they?

tens of millions a year spent pushing to end animal agriculture- thats the real agenda.

donate LOCALLY- money, supplies, and most especially your time- a shelter pet will appreciate it

No, you don't have to be a vegan to work for The HSUS. I wasn't when I began working there. I am now after learning more about the many "surplus" chicks and calves produced in the process of egg and milk production. I didn't want to support these animals being suffocated in trash bags or sometimes ground up alive, in the chicks' case, or being confined in small crates for veal and sometimes suffering greatly during slaughter, in the calves' case. I try to live my life in a way that causes the least suffering for other people and animals. But my diet is ultimately my choice, as it is for everyone.

Grassroots-level support of HSUS appears to be waning. For instance, Pilot Travel Centers have ceased collecting donations for HSUS:

http://www.pilottravelcenters.com/About_Us/Story.aspx?id=252

Ohio, too.

'NEVER' donate humane society at all, its just like you are supporting them to demolish,eggs, pork,chicken, beef,dairy products,then would be more expensive to order from china,who knows what kind of meat you are getting.

"It started with a 600k grant from Philip Morris, and has attacked groups such as the CDC and Mothers Against Drunk Driving to name a few."

So what? Even the founder of Mothers Against Drunk Driving left the organization! The group is now full of extremists who want all cars installed with breathalizers and other nonsense. Imagine being late for work because you used mouth wash in the morning and can't start your car.

I don't like MADD either. Guess that makes me a big evil meanie too. :'(

You are all completely daft. You've all got your heads up your arses with your biases and emotions - I think you, grrl, should be kicked off scienceblogs because science is supposed to be about questioning assumptions and getting to the truth of things - not about pushing your political/emotional agenda - clearly, you feel threatened enough by some in the "ARA terrorists" squad about your animal experimentation that, just like agriculture, you close ranks rather than, as scientists should, question your grounds. But having perused enough blogs on scienceblogs, the closed-minded gleeful snootiness - including making fun of the Christian fish symbol by turning it into a Darwin symbol evolving feet, reductionism/straw man at its best - I know you won't be asked to question yourself/selves and your assumptions.

In fact, pretty much everyone reading this page should sit the f*ck down with a nice heavy fiction book about the complexity of human nature, instead of demanding "Pure Unadulterated Binary and Factual Simplicity, Because That's What I Want And I Have a Right Dammit!" from everyone else. Start with Crime and Punishment. Then proceed through the Western Canon. It might do you some good, or at least shut you up long enough to think before you jump on the keyboard.

jane: first, scienceblogs is not an organization filled with mindless idiots and droids, so i would not be kicked off scienceblogs for expressing an opinion. second, you clearly know nothing whatsoever about science. science is about making observations, formulating testable hypotheses to learn more about those observations, and then using the resulting data to further refine those hypotheses for more testing.

that said, a scientist, like an idiot (such as you seem to be), is absolutely entitled to express their political opinions. the fact that scientists know more than simple-minded dolts such as yourself, should be taken into account by our elected officials when making decisions about public policy. the fact that loudmouthed know-nothings, such as yourself, are trying to hold hostage those people who are trying to make something of themselves and to help this world, is an abomination.

the fact that your rant is a weak-minded and incomprehensible mess demonstrates nothing more than your ongoing case of explosive mental diarrhea; unrestrained, unprocessed and filled with whatever detritus has been shoved down your throat by those in power who are force-feeding you their latest party line.

Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act Lawsuit Filed Against H$U$

grrlscientist — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 09:59:54 +0000

Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act Lawsuit Filed Against H$U$

tags: humane society of the united states, HSUS, H$U$, Feld Entertainment, Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus, animal rights, animal welfare, lawsuit, Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, RICO

In the United States on New Year's Eve, a judge dismissed a federal lawsuit filed by a consortium of animal rights groups including the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS). The lawsuit alleged that Feld Entertainment, the parent company of the Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus, mistreated elephants in violation of the Endangered Species Act. Now the Circus has turned around and filed a lawsuit against the HSUS, two HSUS lawyers, and a number of other animal rights organizations under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act.

The original animal rights lawsuit was filed more than nine years ago, and was based on information provided by a former Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus elephant "barn helper" named Tom Rider. After Rider left his circus job, he was paid by animal rights groups to testify about the allegedly bad treatment of their elephants. In all, the original lawsuit's plaintiffs paid Rider more than $190,000 -- his sole source of income for eight years while the litigation made its way through the court system.

The Court frowned upon Rider being paid to act as a witness in this animal rights' coalition lawsuit.

"The Court finds that Mr. Rider is essentially a paid plaintiff and fact witness who is not credible, and therefore affords no weight to his testimony," said Judge Emmet Sullivan in his December ruling that accompanied his dismissal of the animal rights groups' lawsuit [PDF]. "[T]he primary purpose [for the payments] is to keep Mr. Rider involved with the litigation."

Judge Sullivan's finding is now being used by Feld Entertainment to sue everyone who played a part in this collaborative "racketeering" scheme, including Rider as well as the nonprofit "Wildlife Advocacy Project" charity that the Washington, DC law firm of Meyer Glitzenstein & Crystal allegedly used to launder money between their plaintiff clients and Rider. One of these clients putting up money to support Rider was the Fund for Animals, which merged with HSUS in 2004.

Feld Entertainment's lawsuit alleges bribery, fraud, obstruction of justice, and money laundering charges against HSUS and two of its corporate attorneys, three other animal rights groups, Meyer Glitzenstein & Crystal, and all three of that firm's named partners. To quote David Martosko, who writes the blog, HumaneWatch.org;

America's farmers, ranchers, hunters, fishermen, research scientists, fashion designers, and restaurateurs have seen for decades how the animal rights movement can behave like a mobbed-up racket. But it's still shocking to see the evidence laid out on paper. In a treble-damage lawsuit like this, a jury could actually do the humane thing and finally put HSUS out of business completely.

You can read the full text PDF of the 135-page lawsuit courtesy of HumaneWatch.

grrlscientist Fri, 02/26/2010 - 04:59

Tags

humane society of the united states

lawsuit

Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act

RICO

Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus

ethics

pets

Categories

Life Sciences

Ugh. I recognize that many researchers aren't keen on the HSUS, and the HSUS has no shortage of problems... but... "HumaneWatch"?

Really?

A site run by the "Centre for Consumer Freedom"?

These are the hacks who shill for Big Tobacco and payday loans and fight MADD on behalf of distillers and brewers? And lest you think they're on the side of science, remember that these are the folks who spent half a mil spreading misinformation about obesity on behalf of the fast food industry.

bork: Tobbacco companies, fast-food companies, liquor companies, ect. have absolutely NOTHING to do with Humanewatch-they, along with supporters of Humanewatch advocate personal choice-NOT people or groups stuffing their agendas down others throats, as HSUS is desparately trying to do. They are NOT the ones attacking farmers, horse and pet breeders, hunters, and those who value their constitutional rights-HSUS is. By the way- I have never seen these companies tie someone down and force cigarrettes, alcohol, or burgers in their mouth. People need to start recongnizing they are responcible for themselves-and stop blaming everyone else for their life problems.

GO FELD ENTERTAINMENT!!! We are routing that you put this scumbag HSUS out for good!!!

This has been a day that many people had longed to see, I myself would be glad to assist Feld in anyway for free. If we take a look at the H$U$ and the many people lives that they have destroyed from the gamefowl industry to people who raise puppies for a living. If we were to take there money and everything they enjoy from life this would be a victory. Now who would be wrong? This machine needs to be put out business and I would love to see wayne and goodwin in a jail cell!!!

"Tobbacco companies, fast-food companies, liquor companies, ect. have absolutely NOTHING to do with Humanewatch-"

Well, this is literally true. Some more background - As bork points out, HumaneWatch is a production of Richard Berman's Center for Consumer Freedom, which sourcewatch.org describes as a
"front group for the restaurant, alcohol, tobacco and other industries. It runs media campaigns which oppose the efforts of scientists, doctors, health advocates, environmentalists and groups like Mothers Against Drunk Driving, calling them "the Nanny Culture -- the growing fraternity of food cops, health care enforcers, anti-meat activists, and meddling bureaucrats who 'know what's best for you.' . . . CCF actively opposes smoking bans and lowering the legal blood-alcohol level, while targeting studies on the dangers of meat & dairy, fatty foods, soda pop, pharmaceuticals, animal testing, overfishing and pesticides." http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Center_for_Consumer_Freedom

More:
San Francisco Chronicle pet column asking "Is the CCF the best watchdog for the HSUS?" (they're pretty doubtful) http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/pets/detail?&entry_id=57838

The Center for Media and Democracy: Rick Berman Attacks the Humane Society
"The Humane Society works to stop egregious, ongoing animal abuse, particularly in money-making enterprises like puppy mills, factory farming, dogfighting, cockfighting, and unsporting hunting practices like "canned hunts," where hunters pay to shoot at captive, domestically-raised, exotic animals. While this is a laudable goal, it pits HSUS against a significant number of wealthy, powerful businesses that engage in animal cruelty practices, like meat and egg producers, factory farmers, canned hunting businesses, contract research labs that do animal testing for big corporations and pharmaceutical companies that exploit animals to manufacture drugs like Premarin . . .HumaneWatch.org is essentially a one-man blog written by David Martosko, a spokesman for Berman and CCF. Martosko is best known for parroting Berman's industry-paid positions that mercury levels in edible fish pose no harm to children, and drunk driving is no longer much of a problem." http://www.prwatch.org/node/8894

A Response from the Humane Society (re: HumaneWatch & the CCF) http://www.opposingviews.com/i/humane-society-on-its-battle-with-center…

Look, I don't know anything about the merits of this specific case, and like bork I'm assuming (perhaps wrongly) that this was posted because of the animal research issue - which *is* something HSUS is involved in. Fair enough - (like my approval is in any way necessary!) Bringing in HumaneWatch/CCF though, esp. without any context for who they are and what they do - ie, a front group whose claims shouldn't really be regarded as credible w/o independent verification and which exists to run deeply unsavory smear campaigns for various industries (Parents don't need to worry about mercury levels in fish?) . . . :(

And "H$U$"? Er . . .what?

Yes, there's the animal testing/research issue (Although the Humane Society isn't PETA which (fwiw) isn't . . .). But while I'm sure that's part of what's driving HumaneWatch (Berman's been involved in that sort of thing before), just looking at their own press releases/comments in this thread, one can get a rough sense of what other interests they're acting in: factory farming, canned 'hunting', puppy mills, etc. It's not impossible that Feld Entertainment's a client of theirs, but that's almost irrelevant - their MO is to try to smear and marginalize their target w/ anything at hand, whether the goal is getting people to disregard warnings about mercury that cut into the profit margin, or trying to reduce the Humane Society's funding/influence/reputation so it can't run more campaigns like the one it did in support of California's successful Proposition 2, which "Requires that calves raised for veal, egg-laying hens and pregnant pigs be confined only in ways that allow these animals to lie down, stand up, fully extend their limbs and turn around freely... [with] Exceptions made for transportation, rodeos, fairs, 4-H programs, lawful slaughter, research and veterinary purposes."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_2_(2008)
which seem like the least a *humane* *society* would do (but cuts into the profit margin)

or its efforts to fight puppy mills http://www.humanesociety.org/issues/puppy_mills/
which, again . . .

It's time for "Good Idea - Bad Idea"!

Good Idea: For a circus to employ clowns trained at their own Clown College.

Bad Idea: For a circus to employ lawyers trained at their own Clown College.

HumaneWatch is an astroturf campaign created by Richard Berman's Center for Consumer Freedom. Berman has made a very prosperous living by creating corporate front groups to spread disinformation and attack various advocacy groups. His ActivistCash.com site went after Mothers Against Drunk Driving for their "fanatical conviction that no one should be allowed to drink anything before driving." His Guest Choice Network tried to play down the connection between secondhand smoke and lung disease in order to stop anti-smoking laws from being passed. He has been one of the prime movers behind efforts to discredit ACORN. His ObesityMyths.com claims there is no link between obesity and diabetes. He opposed the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act by writing editorials about AIDS patients in restaurant kitchens (this was 1989). He does all of this as a paid lobbyist for various industries, tobacco, alcohol, food processing, and, now fur farming and puppy mills.

Don't be suckered by a Berman group and don't be suckered by the suckers who (knowingly or unknowingly) do his dirty work.

Humanewatch is a website set up by Center for Consumer Freedom for Feld Entertainment and the like. Talk about money laundering.

Ok, I have a longish comment stuck/lost in moderation, but that's ok 'cause a) bork and John McKay said it much better and b) I hadn't seen the previous posts here about the HSUS. Anyway, a few things:

Grrlscientist -

Like folks are saying, HumaneWatch is a product of Berman's Center for Consumer Freedom, an industry front group. See: http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Center_for_Consumer_Freedom
Honestly, it was kind of jarring to come here and see not awesome birds, etc. but a link to that sort of organization. Now, me fretting about my delicate sensibilities is neither here nor there - it's your blog - but . .

1) We're talking, after all, about an industry front group. This doesn't mean they might not have useful info, but it's good to know what they are & do - ie, run smear campaigns frequently riddled w/ questionable or outright dis-information, so that independent verification is pretty essential. Just putting up the link & quote - I don't know if that's endorsing, exactly, but it is kinda caveat-free.

2) You're not a big fan of the HSUS, to put it mildly, for various reasons. Ok - I disagree/am unconvinced, but if you're right, then you have a really strong position. HumaneWatch/CCF opposes the HSUS too - but why? Sure if you go to HumaneWatch's "About the Blogger" page, you'll find, beneath a cute picture of David Martosko w/ a dog, his musings about how he "grew up believing that the best way to help animals is to join a big national group" but now realizes he was wrong; that big rich HSUS needs somebody to keep it honest; that the majority of folks, normal, animal-loving folks - mostly just want to support animal welfare - "actual practical animal cruelty that could be addressed in a hands-on way", but are (it's implied) being suckered by the HSUS into funding fringe animal rights absurdities that just distract from real problems.

And - who knows - on an individual level, he may even personally believe this (and the stuff about drunk driving, and etc.). Hey, for alI I know, he spends his nights pacing sleeplessly, sincerely furious about how the HSUS gets donations from people who think it's a parent org to their local humane society shelter. But of course, that doesn't matter. The question is why HumaneWatch/CCF opposes the HSUS - they're a front group, so who are they fronting for? Now, comments #2 and #3 are suggestive, if in need of a bit of translatin', ie:
"the many people lives that they have destroyed from the gamefowl industry"
[that is, HSUS' efforts against cockfighting and especially canned hunting, where captive animals - often birds, but other kinds as well, are released into an enclosed area for "hunters" to blast away at in a mockery of anything resembling a sport - what Dick Cheney did when he wasn't shooting people in the face (also "put and take" pheasant stocking, where clueless farm-raised birds are dumped out at the start of the season).
to people who raise puppies for a living.
(that is, puppy mills.)

But I don't know how huge of a factor these really are. Sciencebloggers will probably be thinking about the animal research/testing issue, but while Berman's been involved with that in the past, it doesn't look like that's a major thing either, at least at first glance. The LA Times pet blog had a really good recommended-reading post on the whole HumaneWatch/CCF/HSUS thing this week
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/unleashed/2010/02/new-center-for-consum…
including the following, quoting "agribusiness reporter P.J. Huffstutter":

Indeed, Wikipedia lists its provisions, as summarized by the CA Sec. of State:

Requires that calves raised for veal, egg-laying hens and pregnant pigs be confined only in ways that allow these animals to lie down, stand up, fully extend their limbs and turn around freely.
Exceptions made for transportation, rodeos, fairs, 4-H programs, lawful slaughter, research and veterinary purposes.
Provides misdemeanor penalties, including a fine not to exceed $1,000 and/or imprisonment in jail for up to 180 days."

Is "Requir[ing] that calves raised for veal, egg-laying hens and pregnant pigs be confined only in ways that allow these animals to lie down, stand up, fully extend their limbs and turn around freely," some sort of horrible fringe animal rights idiocy? Or perhaps could be considered an animal welfare issue, ""actual practical animal cruelty that could be addressed in a hands-on way"?

But anyway, yeah, it seems pretty plausible that agribusiness is one of the biggest drivers here, although I'm pretty sure there are others. - And Indeed, it's very, very interesting to google "HumaneWatch" and look at where the buzz is.

Of course, they're going to throw anything they can -as sourcewatch notes that CCF's MO involves "marginalizing advocates". Of course they don't like the HSUS getting funding and good pr, because they don't want it able to run these sort of campaigns!

So, grrlscientist . . . I guess my question would be: what does this mean to you? I certainly don't know - after all, you oppose the HSUS, so this might be just fine, in an enemy-of-an-enemy sense. I just wanted to stress that their motives are very much not yours, and all that springs from that.

Ok, now I have *two* long comments in moderation . . . I try to write concisely, really I do! Well, anyway . . .

1) What bork and John McKay said. See http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Center_for_Consumer_Freedom

2) Read this post, by an LA Times blogger, about Humane Watch/CCF and the HSUS: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/unleashed/2010/02/new-center-for-consum… Includes, quoting from an agribusiness reporter's column:
"So, why target [the Humane Society]? Well, for one thing, [the Humane Society] has become increasingly involved in pushing through legislation that alters how animals are treated in the food-production system. The organization was a key voice in the successful campaign last year to get California voters to pass Proposition 2, which was aimed at preventing "cruel confinement" of farm animals (like smaller cages for egg-laying chickens or gestation crates for pregnant sows)."

Three comments in moderation. I'm setting myself up for a horrible quadruple-post, but since I don't know how often (if at all) that gets checked, one more try - shorter, and only one link . . ..

Yep, bork and John McKay and Chris N are right: HumaneWatch is a production of Richard Berman's Center for Consumer Freedom, a industry front group which you can read all about over at Sourcewatch (although since it hasn't been updated lately, they leave out his anti-union activities).

Ok, grrlscientist - you're not a big fan (to put it mildly) of the HSUS, for various reasons that if true are quite good (I'm unconvinced, but that doesn't matter for this). But why is the CCF going after them? Obviously CCFer David Martosko's "about the blogger" musings are (even if - who knows! - absolutely sincere) completely irrelevant; this isn't a personal blog but an industry outlet by an a professional who's worked hard pushing the CCF line on drunk driving (nothing to worry about!), mercury in fish (nothing to worry about!) and obesity (nothing to worry about, not really connected to diabetes, soda's not bad for you,and leave the fast food industry ALOOONE!).

Well, there's a really, really good (and pretty even-handed) post over at one of the LA Times blogs on this whole issue. It includes a link to an agribusiness reporter pointing out

"So, why target [the Humane Society]? Well, for one thing, [the Humane Society] has become increasingly involved in pushing through legislation that alters how animals are treated in the food-production system. The organization was a key voice in the successful campaign last year to get California voters to pass Proposition 2, which was aimed at preventing "cruel confinement" of farm animals (like smaller cages for egg-laying chickens or gestation crates for pregnant sows).".
(Wikipedia points out the it "Requires that calves raised for veal, egg-laying hens and pregnant pigs be confined only in ways that allow these animals to lie down, stand up, fully extend their limbs and turn around freely."

Just so you know . . .

Feld Ent. & ringling bros needs to File a lawsuit to ALL top 20 HSUS officers..
These ORganize syndicates are Economically Descriminating against the Ringling bros and Cultural gamefowl sport practitoner & other, are in Violation of AETA laws & Human rights laws , the NON-TAXPAYING Economic extremist Terrorist animal groups, hsus who SPONSORS Terrorism inside the USA.
Imagine how many human lives, small farmers, taxpayers ,veterans, citizens hsus had ruin because of their Massive Fruadulent SPONSORED EXtremist animal bills...such as the anti-gamefowl sports sponsored bill

You've been pwned.

Interesting argument: suggesting that one can ignore HumaneWatch's arguments because of their sponsors. I agree it's good to know the background of these organizations, but they are still making arguments that need to be countered, and ad hominem is not the way to do it. So now we know that HumaneWatch are dodgy, can we get baqck to their accusations against HSUS?

BTW, that LA Times article doesn't look fair and balanced to me: its one-sided in support of HSUS. And it's misleading, in particular this:

What's not reasonable or sound is vilifying the group for its failure to be something it never claimed to be: an animal shelter.

From the HSUS "About us" page, which the article linked to:

We are the lead disaster relief agency for animals, and we provide direct care for thousands of animals at our sanctuaries and rescue facilities, wildlife rehabilitation centers, and mobile veterinary clinics. (emphasis added)

I hope they can get some convictions and seize HSUS property as proceeds of crime. I also hope PETA is next. Ah, I miss the bad old days when we only had commies to worry about, no lunatics who claim to be acting in the interests of all that's warm and fuzzy.

The documents as they were filed in court by the lawyers for Feld Entertainment can be found here:

http://humanewatch.org/index.php/documents/detail/racketeering_lawsuit_…

It is about 135 pages long, but well worth reading.

Humanewatch.org may have an interest in monitoring HSUS, but it did not file the lawsuit. Feld Entertainment did.

The most interesting part of the whole case (for me) is that the "star witness" of the case against Feld Ent. -- the one who was paid apporimately $200,000 for his testimony -- now seems, for the present at least, to have vanished into thin air, along with the VW van, the telephoto camera, the laptop computer, the DVDs, the cell phone, and all the other goodies he bought with that money.

What has been decided by the court in that case against Feld Ent. is this: the "star witness" had no credibility and his testimony was thrown out by the court.

It will be quite interesting to see how the present Feld Ent. RICO case is decided in court.

Although the motives of Humanewatch.org can be viewed as suspect, I find it difficult to understand why individuals are willing to discard the original court documents out of hand?

Yes, the press release comes from CCF
Yes, CCF founded HumaneWatch

But the RICO filing is real, the allegations are real and there is certainly an extensive history of HSUS and affiliated organizations appearing to overstep their legal bounds (IRS filings, purchase of property that was potentially obtained in violation of a court order and apparent impersonation of law enforcement officials just to name a couple of issues that I have researched myself)

Let's play connect the dots.

Berman's myriad front organizations are never the "grassroots" organizations that they try to look like.

They are paid for by Berman's lobbying clients.

Berman won't say who pays for each front.

HumaneWatch was launched right after Feld Entertainment filed their lawsuit against HSUS.

Who might be paying for HumaneWatch?

has anyone here read the court documents? i have looked over them quickly and they are rather damning. regardless of who is paying for humane watch, the point remains unchanged: HSUS and pals are rather scummy organizations that have gotten their collective hands caught in the proverbial cookie jar. the comments from the judge who dismissed the HSUS lawsuit are enough (in my non-legal opinion) to successfully prosecute HSUS and their cohorts.

Well
The HSUS staffers with their trolling software are now hammering away Republican style to cry "front-group" and "funded -by" to discredit Humane Watch's website.
ALL any PAC or Lobbying Group fronting as a Non-profit and dedicating the bulk of it's resources/staff to fund-raising and Lobbying/Legislative Issues as well as Media Manipulation-like HSUS-can do is... GET USED TO IT.
The Wayne-Train is gettin'derailed.

I am an individual and not a part of CF or paid by any business or corporation. I have been watching the HSUS for years and years...watching their lawsuits against federal agencies, trying to change the regulations put in place by laws passed by Congress...thus changing the intent of the legislators.

HSUS has been lobbying for national laws that would affect many different animals and their owners, using emotionally tinged non-factual propaganda to urge members of the general public to support the HSUS position.

Meanwhile, HSUS was continuously sending out letters to every home owner, asking for donations to help them SAVE pitiful dogs and cats...and the donated funds went into the coffers to pay lobbyists, generate lawsuits and generally change American society in regards to people and their animals. The result: we now have a whole generation of people who believe the HSUS propaganda about farm animals (they are terribly abused by the farmers!), about dog breeders, (dog breeders are all running puppy mills!), and about exotic species (exotics are dangerous invasives and all should be illegal to own!).

The outcome of this is that people do not ask the actual stakeholders for the truth, nor do they seek the facts. They accept without question the negative propaganda put forward by HSUS in their effort to incrementally remove all animals from humans.

Does it matter whether or not www.humanewatch.org has been produced by Berman? What matters is that he has published the facts about the HSUS...by publishing their own IRS tax documents. What could be more real than that?

And, take note that over 2,000 individuals have written to the IRS and requested that the IRS review the non-profit status of the HSUS, since the HSUS activities so often appear to be very questionable in meeting the requirements for non-profit status.

So,it seems to me that it is about time for those organizations harmed by HSUS to take action by filing lawsuits. Good for Feld. I can only hope they win the suit.

I am not a fan of HSUS, and I even give the ASPCA panhandlers a hard time when they harass those of us trying to do some grocery shopping. Nevertheless, some of the commenters do have a point about credibility of the source. Many of those in the avicultural forums, well-intentioned they may be, cite information that can only be traced to some site that is part of the Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF) hierarchy. And this is a mistake. CCF has no credibility, even if I agree with most of their agenda, because their "director of research," David Martosko, has no qualifications. He was a music major in college and seems not to know much about math/statistics (e.g. on drunk-driving statistics and some details of Hg content in seafood at least, he has completely screwed up). It is painful to acknowledge that our most well-known refuge against the FDA and animal rights movement is an astroturf organization.

I think folks this is about choice, to smoke, to enjoy a steak at a favorite resturant. Of course you realize the HSUS is a vegan animal rights social movement and has nothing really do do with animal welfare. No one I have heard put animal welfare with one line but in the movie of Dr. Temple Grandin, who said, "Animals deserve your respect, that is the least you can do when you eat them." She has certainly made the division between animal rights and animal welfare. Of course animal rights activist are usually vegan and would not understand a statement such as this but that is the way most farmers feel about their animals. Taking good care of them to feed the USA protein. I don't think most of the people on the list would survive on a farm an probably neither would the animals. It is an art to care for the land and the animals and a lot of work and study, from pasture planting to feeding. We love this life. As of now it is still legal to farm.
ES

The Humane Society University Now Offers 4-year Degrees

grrlscientist — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 06:59:19 +0000

The Humane Society University Now Offers 4-year Degrees

I was surprised to learn that the fringe animal rights activist group, the Humane Society of the United States, has formed the Humane Society University which was recently granted a license to grant bachelor's degrees in three areas; animal studies, animal policy and advocacy, or humane leadership. They also are licensed to grant certificates for graduate study in those same areas. Required courses are offered online or at their Washington DC site starting autumn term in 2009.

All students, who must have attained junior status elsewhere, are required to take two courses: Animal Protection as a Social Movement and Animals and Ethics. In addition, the interdisciplinary Animal Studies major also requires several more courses; Understanding the Human Animal Bond, Sociology of Animal Abuse, Animals in Literature, Global Animal Issues, and Animal Protection and the Environment. The Animal Policy and Advocacy degree requires courses in Research Methods for Humane Change, Animals and Public Policy, and Animals, Advocacy and Corporate Change. The Humane Leadership degree requires a variety of courses in "humane content," including Humane Education and Animal Cruelty and Interpersonal Violence, as well core courses in nonprofit management.

Robert Roop, the Humane Society University's president, expects that 60 to 70 percent of the university's students will receive their education online.

"It's the only program like it in the United States," gloated Roop. "There's nothing even close to compare to it."

Roop is, of course, ignoring the fact that university biology, zoology and veterinary departments throughout the country already offer plenty of courses about animals and animal care. Further, a university education is about scholarship and critical thinking -- not conforming to a specific prepackaged agenda. Based on their behavior, H$U$ has proven that they are completely incapable of thinking critically about anything, so how can they be capable of teaching the critical thinking skills that are necessary to obtain a university degree? Their narrow-minded agenda lacks basic understanding of ethics and -- contrary to modern American mythology -- also lacks practical animal care expertise because HSUS does not own any shelters in this country according to their own admission. (HSUS funds -- raised through tax-free donations and by selling animal euthanasia manuals -- are devoted to lobbying, six-figure salaries and fancy office space).

Second, this "university" is hiring only temporary adjunct professors to do all their teaching. Not only is this abusive to their professors who are paid shitty below poverty-level wages without any benefits or job security, but this is abusive to the students, who cannot rely on any consistency in the quality of their education when they have a different professor each term.

While I am not surprised that H$US thinks they are qualified to teach university courses nor that they are hiring adjuncts to do all their teaching, I am surprised that they don't require two other courses for all their degrees; one in rifle care and marksmanship and the other in bomb making.

Source:

Inside HigherEd.

I refuse to link to that so-called "university."

grrlscientist Sun, 06/21/2009 - 02:59

Tags

humane society of the united states

Humane Society University

Politics

teaching

Categories

Social Sciences

I believe with your last line you are confusing the HSUS with ALF.

For those not in the know, where's info on why the HSUS is bad?

(By which I mean myself, I should clarify)

Just to clarify, your local Humane Society (who we should all support) is NOT affiliated with the Humane Society of the United States.

Huh - no doubt it was inspired by 'Liberty University', that oxymoronic institute which stults liberty and does not even remotely resemble what educated people imagine a university to be.

Does "animal studies" mean:
a. studying some episodes of The Muppet Show
b. learning to ape the monkeys
c. learning the lyrics to "Talk to the Animals"

You can find out a little more about HSUS at:

http://speakingofresearch.com/2009/05/15/hsus-donations-scandal/

Having set up their own pseudo University I guess their next step will pe to found a pseudo-scientific journal along the lines of the JPANDS where activists can publish articles that support their agenda in the hope (all to frequently fulfilled) that parts of the media will mistake them for real peer reviewed research.

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2006/03/journal_of_american_physician…

Excellent! Thanks for letting me and other know about this program. It sounds great, and I will definitely check it out.

The Humane Society University is just another attempt to indoctrinate sheeple into their cult.

I'm not sure what makes this college different than a technical school or any other college that focuses on one discipline. I am looking into this school now, thanks in part to your article. Maybe you should use less bias language if you want to convince someone something is bad. Also, perhaps back up your facts and allegations.

if you want to waste your hard-earned money on a mickey-mouse degree from a school that has earned our suspicions regarding what exactly the edumacation there actually represents, then you definitely have more money than brains! further, i have more facts about this school and the wingnuts who are running it than you obviously do, but facts have never convinced zealots, wingnuts and kool-aid drinkers of anything they didn't already want to believe.

That Investigative WSB-TV Piece That H$U$ Doesn't Want You to See

grrlscientist — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 05:59:27 +0000

That Investigative WSB-TV Piece That H$U$ Doesn't Want You to See

tags: Humane Society of the United States, HSUS, H$U$, cloning food, terrorism, animals, pets, false advertising, streaming video

I have followed this video as it has been removed from YouTube and been suppressed several times due to legal bullying by the activist and terrorist organization, the Humane Society of the United States (H$U$). This investigative report, which appeared a couple weeks ago on WSB TV [channel 2 in Atlanta], reveals that H$U$ uses misinformation to trick the public into thinking they are donating funds to build local shelters for homeless pets, and to help rescue pets separated from their owners due to natural disasters. In fact, according to this investigative report (and even by HSUS's own admission on this video!), this is not where these funds go at all. Fortunately, the video has found a safe haven in a most unlikely place where it will hopefully not be deleted again: the Iranian Video Sharing site, Vidoosh [3:37]

Some people are reporting trouble uploading this video, but if you click here, it should solve the problem

grrlscientist Wed, 06/03/2009 - 01:59

Tags

humane society of the united states

Categories

Ahahahaha; oh, the irony, it's killing me with laughter. While tyrannical tactics are employed to suppress speech in the "free world", the speech finds a safe haven in a country the news loves to depict as a backward authoritatian state (hey, I'll agree with the authoritarian bit, the backward bit is dubious, and I love the Iranians though not their government).

It's still not as bad as PETA. PETA has the most bogus ways of attracting donors by using celebrities and shock tactics. Then the money they receive goes to buying walk in freezers as they kill about 90% of the animals they claimed to have saved. At least the HSUS actually use the money in semi benefit to animals. (Isn't lobbing the way that laws get passed in this country?)

http://petakillsanimals.com/petasdirtysecret.cfm