When things are investigated, knowledge is extended. When knowledge is extended, the will becomes sincere. When the will is sincere, the mind is correct. When the mind is correct, the self is cultivated. -- Confucius
Politically correct ideals are garbage: true wisdom comes from decades of deep thought and neutral observation. Only a so-called sociopath could ascertain wisdom from this crazy world in a neutral way. Cool thoughts- uncorrupted by modern politics, social norms, or societal ideals- are required for wisdom. Questioning everything, and going against the grain on all universally accepted norms is the path to true intelligence. The Gods notice this.

12/22/11

AWA: Animals Weep Aroundus

The 'welfare advocate' crowd is even worse than the 'rights activist' crowd...

I have written before on the problems with animal rights activists and their methods. I stand by it. But there is another side, who hates the ARA's and says they are also animal lovers. They call themselves animal welfare advocates (AWA). They believe in keeping and caging any animals you want, supposedly as long as you take proper care of them. This invariably includes exotic and other wild animals. While I wrote on that issue once as well, making it clear I do not agree with the idea of keeping wild animals for any reason, they have of late tried to turn me to their views. We have a common enemy so to speak, but nothing else to work with. They are generally cordial and cooperative, listening and being open as well, much more so than the ARA crowd. The pleasantries mask their darker side though, and I thought it only balanced to post my view of this side as well.


It is telling that their alleged love for animals requires caging them into small enclosures. While tigers roam up to 200 miles per day in the wild, their lives as pets can never be happy in any size pens. Cheetahs roam a lot as well, and run down prey at 75mph. How is this accommodated for when they are chained like dogs in people's yards? Virtually no exotic animal owner has facilities that properly emulate the conditions that wild animals crave and need. Improper enclosures are a given, and neglect and abuse are usually close behind. No matter the intentions, it is simply impossible to properly take care of wild animals as they need too much space, eat expensive and hard to get foods, and are inherently dangerous. Just like the pit bull crowd (you know: ARA's and their 'BSL' cause {rolling eyes}), the AWA's have their own ideas about how 'harmless' large, wild carnivorous animals are. Of course, they would never turn on their owners. Just like the sweet pit bulls that keep attacking babies (at least weekly I see a new news story about this happening...). While pits attack people much more often than tigers or lions, it is the same risk. The end problem is the two-pronged attitude of a.control, and, b.covetousness.


Owners of fighting dogs and owners of wild animals are all insecure people on power trips that want to show the world, incl. themselves, that they can control such an exotic or dangerous creature. They also are envious and covet the animal's beauty and fur. Cats and regular dogs are not enough for them. This is where ARA's and AWA's are similar, for starters. Dissimilarities fade even more if you examine the tactics and thinking processes of both sides. They both use the internet extensively to promote their ideas. Both sides also use numerous aliases, and they both block out information that contradicts their points. They are all closed minded. Various key figures of both sides play the hero role and are followed closely by their minions. When the leaders lie, use aliases, and scam people, no one on their respective sides call them out. It gives the other side fodder for accusations but as both sides do these things, it is hypocrisy on a large scale.


For example, one well known person that plays the folk hero role for one of these sides has been shown with undercover videos to have done the following to animals, either directly or under his responsibility: starved many to death, refused medical care to others until they died, not separated kinds that do not get along allowing them to attack one another, fed carrion to them, fed live animals to them, and other awful things. They also have highly improper financial records and constantly beg for donations for emergencies while buying non-essential items at the same time. They further have numerous aliases and business names. Which side am I talking about? These allegations fly both ways. So this or that group kills animals, abuses animals, misfeeds them, lies, uses fake names, has X amount of animals die per year, and so on and so on. And round and round they go.


A few relevant questions would be:
-What facility really kills animals to feed their big cats?
-What facility has the most serious and numerous USDA violations?
-What facility has improper paperwork for its finances?
-What facility has the most animals die?
-What facility uses aliases and front groups?


The AWAs think they already know the answers to those questions. They are sure that a place called BCR is the answer to all of them. It is not. If not, then who do I mean? They should open their eyes and look into it. They will find that some info was found out by PeTA, which will make them say it is all lies. But just because PeTA mismanaged a stray dog and cat shelter for awhile and some of them died like they would have anywhere else, it does not negate everything else that group does. Further, the videos, pictures, etc. taken by their undercover investigators are provable facts. These facts are worth some thought (see links at end).


The AWA's at some point decided to make up their own accreditation to approve their facilities and give it out to their friends, while they claimed that the well known accreditation already existent was phony, as it was only was given to 'one sanctuary in the country'. A very cursory investigation reveals that the original, official organization actually accredited 255 zoos, aquariums, and 15 other places. There is a fine line between a good zoo and a good sanctuary, so perhaps this is a hair-splitting point they hope won't be realized by most. This deception continues to gain steam among the AWA's. See this paste from one of their Facebook walls:
...There is only one accredited sanctuary in the entire country. (www.bigcat.org) However, ALDF slings accreditation around like it means something. WHAT A JOKE!!! [redacted] Is Reputable. [redacted] is accredited by the United States Zoological Associaton...” 
 
This link shows otherwise: http://www.aza.org/current-accreditation-list/ .The list of "related" facilities that are not zoos or aquariums is here. There are 15 of them. The AWA ad-hoc group, which promotes breeding and selling mainly, is the U.S. Zoological Ass. The original group that certifies facilities is the Assoc. of Zoos and Aquariums.

 
One wave of excitement amongst the AWA's was a new petition type page one of them made, which openly claimed that two major animal rights groups, one big cat sanctuary, and one well known insane internet troll are all in collusion to steal a tiger from a truck stop owner. After posting this, they may very well add me to their blacklist as well. (had link, but site is down now..)


This blogger has no desire to join any cause, and would prefer the tiger referenced remains where it is living now. The place it is going to be sent to, absent a last minute legal action, is a worse place for it if you ask me. This does not mean I support either the ARA or the AWA side. It means there are three sides to every story, and three views, and three options, if not more. Compromise, examination of options, weighing of facts, rejection of hyperbole and rumors, verification of claims, and dialogue could have resolved this five years ago in a way to everyone's liking. Unfortunately neither side engaged in any one of the aforementioned dispute resolution tactics. They both chose mud slinging instead.


So now the ARA's think they won, and they think the lawsuit proved the tiger is mistreated and abused. The AWA's think their imagined “rights” to own dangerous animals without regulations were violated, and they want to fight it out with conspiratorical rants. They are both wrong. The lawsuit was begun, surely as a PR- op., by a major ARA group and it was won based upon a technicality regarding what name was on the tiger owner's permit. The state filled it out wrong. No abuse or neglect was proven at trial.The AWA's, in the meantime, like a possessed child, spout off wide-eyed accusations of some unproven collusions between PeTA, the ALDF, BCR, and the net troll. The ALDF is solely responsible for this lawsuit, as well as the ARA's that wrote to them to start with. I could list them, but do their names matter now? The behind the scenes instigators got off scot-free. Until their next cause of the day...


It seems to me that PeTA just chimed in a couple times and nothing more. Their claim to have proof of the old USDA violations has never been presented. The ALDF saw an opportunity to gain publicity and sued the state while trying very hard to omit the person in question from defending himself. Then they used a pointless technicality to legally bully a judge into a decision. They have no verified info, that they have released at least, which shows animal harm. BCR was willing to take in said tiger, but dropped it when the owner refused. They do not take in donations for this issue to resolve in their favor somehow, and have become a lightening rod for idiotic accusations by the AWA's. The AWA's themselves need to realize, or admit, that all ARA groups and activists as well as others they dislike are not having backalley meetings to ruin them. Different groups do their own things- that is why they are different groups. Their supposed rights to own exotic pets are as laughable as the 'rights' of smokers.

The ARA's simultaneously need to stop spreading lies and exaggerating everything they read.The alleged admiration for animals from both sides needs to be reevaluated and the players need to act accordingly. Many ARA people mean well but are misguided, but the worst examples of alleged animal lovers are not only the ARA slacktivists. They also include the hunters, trappers, cullers, fishermen, vivisectors, carnivores, fur wearers, many alleged advocacy groups, as well as the enslavers better known as entertainment users and exotic owners (AWA's).


All in all, many people, including myself, are sick of the feuds/ lies/ campaigns/ petitions/ stories/ etc., etc... Animals are special creatures, much more special than us humans, and they deserve respect and admiration. They should never be used as an excuse to argue and powertrip. I am done with it. Good riddance, politician-wannabes.


Suggested Links:

Well known AWA with many supporters: link1 link2 link3

Their view (note the rambling and irrelevant allegations, and the glossing over of their answers to accusations against them). (Person/facility above is but one of many examples of an AWA. Also look up exotic animal breeders/ sellers/ buyers, animal acts, private zoos, etc. Compare to links and examples in ARA post- eerily similar!)

Site about dispute mentioned above between AWA's and ARA's.

Relevant documentaries and series to watch- all inarguable--
also watch Animal Planet series "Fatal Attractions"


© james platt 2011

No comments:

Post a Comment

constructive comments appreciated. name calling and links deleted.