RSPCA urges more control on exported pups (The Age, extract)

ANIMAL rights activists are calling for the Federal Government to close a loophole allowing thousands of Australian puppies to be sold to Asian pet farms.

Unlike other live animal exports, companion animals such as cats and dogs are exempt from export declarations. As a result, authorities have no record of whether the animals are exported for private or commercial reasons...

Australian dogs are popular because there is no need for quarantine in many countries, including Singapore, and because they have not been exposed to rabies.

But the puppies can have different fates, according to Singapore-based animal rights campaigners....

Many pets are abandoned and, according to the Singapore Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, purebred animals including Jack Russells, shih-tzus and Maltese are increasingly being dumped.

An animal purchased in good faith who grows too large, barks or is unruly is likely to be abandoned

http://www.theage.com.au/national/rspca-urges-more-control-on-exported-pups-20081129-6ng6.html

It's not as if we don't know what happens to most animals in Asian countries. But do the puppy-mill breeders care? Of course not. But posting this may not have been so smart after all - wait until the "livestock" export farmers get hold of it, there will be shiploads of all breeds of dogs sent off to China. After all, if there's a quid in it, what do the animals matter?

Nicky

Nicky in reality we too treat pups and dogs like that.
We buy them as gifts, sometimes clearly unwanted gifts and they end up on the street.
Is it any different in any country?
Well yes in some Asian country's they eat them.
But we can not change that, we truly can not change that.
I am aware of your opposition to live cattle exports, I think it is uncharitable to compare , or suggest in any way the two trades are connected.
And over and again expressing the view live exports are so evil is not changing minds on the issue.
Of all who post against the trade you do at least can debate without uncontrolled anger.
But while I will forever support less cruelty to any animal, the reasons for live exports are far more than those often given.
I understand the thread is not for me , my views will see me dumped on soon .
But as for killing all sheep and beef in Australia? pricing rules it out markets do not exist and it will not happen.
Yes some unions based on self interest [membership] want it but reality is often hidden when self interest is involved.
I hate to think of my little pups Sky and Blue lost on the streets but drive past plenty every day never knowing it, you can not change human nature, not that I call those who leave them human.

Nicky,
In truth the RSPCA wants more control (period). Refer to the first law of organizations. Self preservation first.
The RSPCA knows that every time they highlight animal cruelty in the press they get more donations. They need to show their donors that they are doing something, if only blowing smoke.

Sure the issue is one of concern of that there is no doubt.

What is needed here is some perspective.
• Dogs are imported “to improve” a breed and return on investment.
That means to meet aesthetic standard? e. g. the British Bull dog standard demands a flat face…to hell with the effect on the animal. Look up historic pictures of this breed and see what it originally looked like.
In breeding is done to gain desirable features like coat colour or pattern etc.
What do you imagine happens to the failures?
There is no guarantee that a show dog say Shih Tzu won’t spend a great portion of its show life in a contained area so as not to damage the coat. What guarantee is there that all the pups will go to good homes and not to a puppy farm?
Should other countries therefore refuse to send us dogs? Imports of German Shepherds were banned at one stage all that occurred was inbreeding and genetic faults.
• Puppy farms in Australia like all farms, some are good and some aren’t.
Some of the worst conditions I’ve seen are in “showing breeders” (backyarders)
• Look in any pet shop window (there are some good and some well….
And look at the ‘cute’ crosses bred to SELL. They often cost more than purebreds.Labradoodles, Bull Arabs etc simply marketing breeds.
• Christmas puppies often share a simple fate at Easter when the family wants to go on holiday.
So who is to blame? Breeders who want a dog that meets a standard, those who see a $ or shops who fill a need? The answer must come down to the individual owners. Shouldn’t we clean up our own backyard before dictating to the world?

Nicky:

I am 100% with you on this one again!

Maybe each one of us should stand in front of the mirror and ask ourselves what we can do to make this world a better place for the animals who, unlike humans, are incapable of complaining about their lot in the big picture and consequently suffer in silence as they are manipulated, mutilated and murdered to satisfy the whims and financial desires of the "superior species"

We SHOULD be concerned as each day we are observing increasing levels of crime and violence in our society, diminishing levels of punishment and especially the acceptance of personal responsibility and liability for hurt inflicted upon others.

We are now witnessing an unprecedented upsurge in whale "beachings" due to reasons that remain officially obscure..( although I suspect that the US` operation of it`s "submarine fleet communication system" HARP may figure predominantly as the possible electronic predator!)

Things seem to heating up as we notice that the Government wants an investigation as to how we can expediently save these helpless creatures and return them unharmed to their natural environment!....(free from confusing electronic signals with which they are being bombarded around the clock and around the world....maybe?)

What chance do these animals have, when the human race seems to be so intent on destoying itself over simple everyday issues like religion, power and money?

Hey guys, I hear what you're saying, and thank you, especially Cuphandle. In Australia, however, dogs are less likely to be skinned (alive) for their fur or eaten. I'd suggest also that people who have unwanted dogs are (ever so slightly) more likely to surrender them at a shelter, although I certainly take on board Belly's comments. All too many are not. As for so-called "designer breeds", more often that not they have all the difficulties of the breeds from which they are mixed and fewer of the qualities for which they are supposedly bred. Breeding in the deformities causes the dogs lifelong difficulties (flat-faced dogs live with significant respiratory problems).

My personal view is that this is a contemptible "industry", and does little more than contribute to the 200,000 dogs who are destroyed needlessly in this country every year (and those are just the reported numbers). The "impulse buying" of dogs as gifts is now being policed rather more carefully, at least by shelters. The Dogs' Home where I live will not sell dogs in December.

Belly, I hope I don't "come down on you". I understand from other threads that you come from a union perspective, so I'm a little surprised by some of your comments. I think the AMIEU certainly has a case when it comes to the export of livestock. It isn't only them, either, the reports done by Heilbron and Larkins and Lindner backed up everything they said and more, as do ABS statistics. And at the end of the day, there is not, and should never be, any excuse for knowingly providing animals - any animal, be it a sheep, a cow, a goat, horse, camel, dog or cat, rabbit, rat or mouse, to be brutalised - by anyone. It's that simple.

Nicky

Niki,
So you think our hypocrisy is acceptable. And the antics of the wild life entrepreneur who has a rug and hat of cat skins trapped in his nature reserves.
And you see no conflict with shooting, poisoning feral cats and dogs all of whom have decimated our wild life …then there are the cute bunnies and Reynard fox and his uncountable rellies?

Do you think Asian don’t know about our practices?
Yet you blindly support the RSPCA cynical attack on Asia. I put it you that they are an easy target rather than cleaning up our own back yard.

Once any animal is dead it matters little what happens then…big bonfire, in the river or eaten.
Do I mention our lamb skin, rabbit fur, calf skin, goat skin Crocodile skin, Emu et al all of which their meat ends up on the table.

Like I said all of this is a worry but before we insult our neighbours by trying to impose our cultural anthropomorphised perspective over what is ultimately protein.
Logically you are either arguing on an emotive level or you are selling the idea of mass veganism.

Even if you stop the trade there what do you imagine would happen …that the Asian’s would say ‘oh well’ and stop the practice? It would increase resentment particularly with our domestic record.
You ignored my last post so here’s another based on facts not emotions.
e.g. where are your figures that show that the dogs being eaten come from Australia. those I've seen certainly weren't even remotely identifiable as any breed let alone Australian in origin.All you've got is 200k dogs being shipped and a squillion strays where is the cause and effect evidence.
Regardless, You’re right it IS a worry and I don't like it but fair crack of the whip.

*any animal, be it a sheep, a cow, a goat, horse, camel, dog or cat, rabbit, rat or mouse, to be brutalised - by anyone. It's that simple.*

Your problem is in the semantics Nicky, for you apply the term
"brutalise" to any species eating another species for dinner.

Yet one species eating another is part of nature and in fact keeps
populations sustainable. The lions exploit the zebras and wildebeest,
etc.

As long as you try to deny the realities of nature, your philosophy
will remain flawed, I am sorry to say. Go back and read Origin
of Species

Isn't this just the teensiest bit precious?

What exactly is the difference, ethically, between breeding dogs for a life of slavery and breeding dogs for meat?

What is the difference between treating animals badly in Australia, and exporting them so that they can be ill-treated abroad?

The moment someone can provide me with a valid reason why we should consider that humans have the right to enslave other creatures for their own selfish emotional gratification, will be the moment you get my attention.

Until then I will continue to believe that it is all about posturing, for reasons that frankly escape me when there are so many other more obvious issues to engage with, and which will have a greater impact on our lives than exporting Fido and Spot.

Dear Nicky,

The RSPCA does the best that it can with
limited funds and staff. And, if they're
concerned about the export of our dog breeds,
there must be a case to answer for.

I think that you've summed it up rather well.
Cruelty to animals, no matter what kind
(or where) must be prevented. Period.

Perhaps buying a RSPCA 2009 Calendar, or making
a donation, for them to continue working
towards helping animals in distress would
be appropriate at this time of the year.

Thank you for bringing this disgraceful trade to our attention Nicky.

Puppy farms have been operating in Australia for years and under the most appalling conditions. During 1994, the Ballarat council advised Animal Liberation Victoria that over 1000 dogs were kept at a puppy farm though the permit only allowed for 540.

A video revealed the dogs had no bedding or kennels. Some of the dogs were sleeping in 44 gallon drums tipped on their side. The dogs were a pitiful sight. Their long coats were matted and caked in mud, their spirits were broken from years of confinement and repeated pregnancies.

RSPCA informed ALV that they had been refused entry to this property 22 times.

The fact that a politician/vet (Dr. Ron Wells) was keeping dogs in appalling conditions was big news.

April 1996 –The Age newspaper wrote a two page article on the Ballarat puppy farm. “New” allegations were made that dogs owned by Dr Wells died from starvation and disease at the former knackery in Ballarat.

Dr. Wells was exposed for using Victorian Tax payers money to further his own business interests.

Debra Tranter, ALV’s puppy farm campaigner reports: "The dogs are filthy. They are kept in dirty pens and never bathed or groomed. Their fur forms huge matting, which can be quite painful. My hands were black from patting them. It's years of build up of dirt and grime. They are very frightened dogs.”

1997. Rob Hulls (ALV) attacks Premier Jeff Kennett over his support for Dr Wells and insists he stand down as patron of RSPCA.

Yet these sick and demented animals continue to be incarcerated in shocking conditions where puppy farmers breed from them and export their puppies throughout Asia, while greedy, dehumanised politicians strut our halls of parliament.

Nicky - one must question the depths to which this nation has descended when your description “brutalised” is challenged by those with vested interests who condone appalling animal abuse. To them, animals are simply regarded as a viable commodity for humans to sadistically exploit but which part of “brutalised” do they not understand?

Examinator, I do apologise if you believe that I have ignored an earlier post of yours. Did I ever say that I condone the cruel treatment of animals in Australia? I addressed your post in terms of the breeding of deformed dogs for "aesthetic" reasons, also the giving of dogs as "gifts".

I do not remain silent to cruelty in other countries just because Australia has a shocking animal welfare record. This fight has no borders.

You're right, once an animal is dead it matters little what happens to it, but it is the manner of death (and the cruel treatment of all animals) with which I take issue.

Yabby, I have no interest in your theories of evolution, seen it all before. As I have pointed out, the Asians see no difference between eating carnivores and eating herbivores (or anything that moves or breathes, in fact); you have never been able to adequately address that one, have you?

Pericles, I also do not believe in the indiscriminate breeding of dogs for what you call 'enslavement'. But dogs have, like it or not, become domesticated creatures, and those who are here therefore are entitled to our care and protection. The two dogs I have are "rescue" dogs, and I really don't think they feel enslaved.

Dickie, that puppy farm was an absolute atrocity; I remember seeing it on the news, and I know Debra Tranter. Foxy, I am a member of the RSPCA (the only animal organisation to which I belong) and have just bought their Christmas cards (on the understanding that they are not made in China - if they are, I shall return them. Tip - if you want to buy them the National site is sold out, but you can get them through the RSPCA NSW site. The RSPCA has a long way to go, but of late it has certainly become more proactive.

Nicky

*but which part of “brutalised” do they not understand?*

Ah Dickie, but which part of "brutalised" don't you understand?

50 years ago, when you were still young and attractive, you might
have had the good fortune to attract the attentions of a farmer :)

As a wedding gift you might have received an axe and would have
been expected to regularly select a fowl from the flock, chop
its head off and pluck it for the family dinner. All very
sustainable and certainly not cruel.

You have told us that you were not that fortunate, your family
only eating chicken on Xmas day etc. Ok fair enough.

The point is that Nicky thinks that eating chickens is brutal,
97% of societiy do not seem to agree with her and have no problem
tucking in.

Clearly its her that has a problem with how she uses the word,
not the rest of society.

But posting this may not have been so smart after all - wait until the "livestock" export farmers get hold of it, there will be shiploads of all breeds of dogs sent off to China. After all, if there's a quid in it, what do the animals matter?

Nicky
Posted by Nicky, Sunday, 30 November 2008 8:54:24 PM

Nicky what you think they are not involved already.

AQIS must keep a register of all puppies and tag numbers.
If there were to be an outbreak because of intensive puppy breeding AQIS ‘must have some way of tracing the batch (for want of better terms.)

We must know if these puppies are being produced in products such as eg chewy Yabby bits.

China recalled their lollies which were exported to Australia which was contaminated...

In other words you follow the paper trail from port to restaurant……

BTW Interesting the X Minister for advisor insisted there were no dogs pups being exported out of Australia to Asia…

http://www.aact.org.au/greyhounds.htm

*The point is that Nicky thinks that eating chickens is brutal,
97% of societiy do not seem to agree with her and have no problem
tucking in. *

Posted by Yabby,
Yabby
Most people do not know about the conditions they are kept. Or that they are thrown into the fire alive to remove feathers then stuck into boiling water while still alive before having their throat cut.
Free Range is approved by most of us however you cant buy It!

You will be pleased to know I`m off to the bush where there is no computers.

Yabby

It is against my better judgement to respond to your vacuous arguments, however, Nicky is not objecting to people eating chickens. You continue with your red herrings.

And what happens to an animal after death is of no concern.

What you continue to deny is that animal suffering in this nation is on a vast scale.

What is beyond your comprehension is that humans cannot just take from these creatures without giving them something in return.

We owe them a merciful life, and we owe them a merciful death.

Matthew Scully, a former speechwriter for President George W. Bush, wrote "Dominion: The Power of Man, the Suffering of Animals, and the Call to Mercy."

Why not educate yourself and read his book?

Just as a little aside, Avon cosmetics are all made in China. After the contamination, would you put that on your eyes or your face?

PALE, the AACT website doesn't seem to have been updated for a while, but my understanding is that greyhounds are exported to Macau, and South Korea (as a minimum). AQIS probably doesn't know the half of what is exported - even at sheep and cattle ladings, they are rarely to be found.

Dickie, I agree with you about Yabby's vacuous arguments, but do you think he is capable of reading work of the quality of Matthew Scully - much less gaining any understanding of it?

Nicky

It is really not at all impressive, the way you guys constantly sidestep the main issue.

>>Pericles, I also do not believe in the indiscriminate breeding of dogs for what you call 'enslavement'<<

I assume therefore that you what you do believe in, Nicky, is the "non-indiscriminate" breeding of dogs for the purposes of them being sold to humans as "pets".

So how exactly would you "discriminate", and why?

>>But dogs have, like it or not, become domesticated creatures, and those who are here therefore are entitled to our care and protection<<

This is nonsensical. If there were no trade in dogs-bred-as-pets (see above), they would not need our "care and protection". Not only that, there would be no need to "rescue" them...

>>The two dogs I have are "rescue" dogs, and I really don't think they feel enslaved.<<

This is pure sophistry. It reminds me of the plantation owners in 1840's Louisiana who used a similar "happy darkies" argument to justify their actions, routinely splitting up families, buying and selling people, all the while believing that it was justified by the Bible (Gen 9:8-15)

So please enlighten me.

What is the difference between breeding dogs to become owned by people for the span of their natural life, and slavery?

You also failed to answer my question on the difference between this practice, and breeding them for their meat.

I'd really like to hear your justification.

Not only that, but you also sidestepped my question on why it is so important to stop animals being exported, when we are quite comfortable mistreating them at home?

It would seem to me that the only answer that can possibly be ethically held on this topic is to outlaw the breeding of dogs-as-pets entirely.

And yes, I am serious.

Nicky:

We must strive to maintain a stiff upper lip in light of the adversity thrust at us by some of the recalcitrent representatives of our society, who themselves seem intent upon denigrating every well-intentioned and most sincere statements of our support for animal welfare!

Todays news report of some inhumane bastard(s) "harrassing and then setting alight a live Possum" in Bathurst, leaves little doubt as to the general attitude toward animals from a large proportion of our community!....Isn`t it strange that when these events occur, the local police have to ask for witnesses to come forward, in most cases a futile excercise as most people do NOT wish to "get involved",....and even if a culprit is apprehended, the penalty at best is a tap on the hand or a very nominal fine! These MONSTERS should NOT be walking the streets as they are at this time practising their vile pastimes on innocent animals, but no doubt will eventually graduate to applying the same twisted sadism on members of the human race,....who at least may be able to fight back!

This is sadly a very sick world in which we are just a few fighting vainly to protect the innocent, whether it be animal or human

Excellent topic Nicky - I had no idea that Australia was exporting puppies. Given that so many animals don't do well here, I think exporting them to uncertain futures to be reprehensible.

While I do eat meat, I try to 'source' meat from butchers who are supplied by ethical farmers; free range, humane slaughtering (if that's not an oxymoron). I also do the odd bit of volunteer work at animal shelters when I am able.

Question for Pericles: Do you regard Guide Dogs for blind people as slaves?

I do know that my two rescue cats regard me as their slave.

Now a question for Yabby: Why do you get so emotional and personally insulting on animal welfare threads? I have begun to think that you 'doth protest too much.'

*Nicky is not objecting to people eating chickens*

Ah Dickie, there we have your mistake up front. Nicky is a committed
vegan and in the past has included people chopping chickens heads
off, so that they can be eaten, as "brutalising". Hence my comment
about semantics here.

*And what happens to an animal after death is of no concern.*

I'm glad you finally see my point, for neither do I care what
happens to my dead carcass one day, nor would a chicken or sheep.

*humans cannot just take from these creatures without giving them something in return.*

In many circumstances they do, which has been my point all along.
Livestock are fed throught droughts, those suffering are put down,
those with worms are treated etc. In nature they are not so
fortunate, they die slowly and miserably.

"Matthew Scully, a former speechwriter for President George W. Bush"

Err Dickie, frankly there are more intelligent and more informed
people to turn to for information, then Bush's speechwriter.
Besides, you are comparing apples and oranges. Did I ever say
that I approve of American factory farming? Or European factory
farming?

My point all along has been that extensive grazing can be done
quite sustainably, with benefits to both livestock and humans.
The fact that we limit the population and land up eating some of
the livestock, has benefits to them, as well as us, for its far
kinder then dying of hunger through overpopulation, as happens
in nature. But first you have to understand nature, and Darwin's
Origin of Species is a great place to start.

Petition and news about the Peanut case, everyone.

http://www.facebook.com/home.php#/group.php?gid=36602960671&ref=ts

Cheers
Nicky

No, Fractelle, I don't consider guide dogs for the blind to be in the same category as dogs-for-pets.

Nor working dogs - sheepdogs etc. - for that matter

But I think you already knew that.

I simply believe that it is extremely cruel and self-indulgent to think that we are entitled to keep animals in captivity for our personal amusement.

Further, I think it is somewhat two-faced of self-described "animal lovers" to believe that it is somehow OK, and an entirely separate problem from all other forms of cruelty.

Incidentally, I have never understood the appeal of keeping cats, birds, fish or any other living creature for personal entertainment either.

"Awwwwww, isn't he cute?"

No, madam. It is merely cruel, and demeans you as a human being.

I don't actually expect any response to the questions I posed earlier:

- what is the ethical distinction between dogs being owned by people for the span of their natural life, and slavery?

- what is the ethical distinction between dogs being bred for such enslavement, and for their meat?

- what is the difference between treating animals badly in Australia, and exporting them so that they can be ill-treated abroad?

- given that Nicky sees "indiscriminate breeding of dogs-for-pets" as bad, where should the line of "discrimination" be drawn?

As I said, I can't see there will be a lot of enthusiasm to get to grips with these.

But it might just be a good exercise, for at least one of the so-called "animal-lovers", to take a shot at an answer or two.

Pericles, sheep dogs and guide dogs are more 'enslaved' than any other dogs. They are expected to 'perform' at the will of their 'owners'. Beyond that, I'm afraid I can't answer your questions, simply because to the first one, I simply don't know, the second one follows on from the first (but I renew my objection to how dogs are bred, raised and slaughtered in Asian countries, Australian livestock fare marginally better than that so long as they are not pigs of chickens), and third question - of course there is no difference. But animals sent to Asia and the Middle East can expect infinite cruelty, whereas in Australia there is at least minimal legislation and scrutiny (as badly enforced as it is).

Yabby, I thought Matthew Scully's writings would be beyond your comprehension. I rest my case.

Nicky

To a point, Nicky.

>>Pericles, sheep dogs and guide dogs are more 'enslaved' than any other dogs.<<

Philosophically, working dogs are indeed equivalent to the plantation slaves.

However, because they have a purpose and a value (all that training) there is a very good chance they will receive better care and attention than a household pet.

The parallel of dogs-as-pets in the antebellum South would be keeping slaves as playthings. Slaves whose continued existence depended on how well they amused their "master".

Chilling concept, n'est-ce pas?

What is abhorrent to me, as I have tried hard to explain, is the completely pointless and self-indulgent practice of "keeping a pet".

At least you are honest in that you cannot distinguish between the morality involved in owning a pet, and that of enslavement, and the ethical difference between enslavement and killing for food.

But if you do have some spare moments, I strongly recommend that you contemplate these ideas.

Because right at this moment, there appears to be no ethical consistency at all in your selection of exported puppies as an animal cruelty "cause".

*Yabby, I thought Matthew Scully's writings would be beyond your comprehension. I rest my case.*

Nicky, if you form your opinions based on a speechwriter for
Quayle, Chaney and Bush, who turns to religion for his
understanding of the world, you are free to do so, as are
Gibo, runner, and the rest.

Sorry, but religion is more a part of the problem and has
little to do with our understanding of nature and the
natural order of things.

You are free to ignore the writings of Charles Darwin
at your peril and ignorance, that is your choice.

I remind you that 150 years later, as our understanding
of the world has increased through the understanding of
genes, dna etc, every major university on the planet takes
his work very seriously.

If you don't understand the fundamentals of nature, the
world will remain a confusing place for you and you can
keep protesting until its your day to fall of the proverbial
perch and be recycled.

Remain ignorant about the natural order of things, or even
turn to Scully and his religion for understanding. That
is your problem dear, not my problem.

"I remind you that 150 years later, as our understanding
of the world has increased through the understanding of
genes, dna etc, every major university on the planet takes
his work very seriously."

But of course Yabby. Darwin did write that:- "In the struggle for survival, the fittest win out at the expense of their rivals because they succeed in adapting themselves best to their environment."

Therefore which author recommended that humans should allow their dogs to breed out of control so they can chop up their puppies with an axe, as you do?

The Marquis de Sade?

*But of course Yabby. Darwin did write that:- "In the struggle for survival, the fittest win out at the expense of their rivals because they succeed in adapting themselves best to their environment." *

Exactly Dickie and my dogs are an example of evolution in action.

About 10 years ago, along came a 6 week old pup from a drover,
which had no pedigreed papers, was the runt of the litter, which
was not only highly intelligent, but full of personality.

She had the genes required to thrive in her environment, her
way to make a living was assured. Evey creature needs to make
a living, one way or another.

Not only was her living assured, but when her offspring came along,
so far twelve of those 14 were all snapped up and their living
is assured too. Some have already produced offspring once again,
all with a way to make a living, mostly as working sheep dogs.

Yup, two pups were destroyed by me, to protect the interests of
the mother and remaining 6 pups. Had you had 8 children in one
go, perhaps you might have some empathy, clearly you do not.

Now if we take Nicky's dogs, in evolutionary terms they are
genetic duds, for that is the end of the line for that particular
family tree.

As Darwin points out, far more individuals of any species will
be created, then can ever survive. That is reality.

Pericles I appreciate the thought in your response to my question.

I wasn't sure about your opinion regarding working dogs at all - I agree a sense of purpose is vital to any sentient creature. Therefore, I believe that would-be pet owners should have permits along the lines of wildlife rescue people do.

I do not believe my cats are at all exploited - in fact in moments of fancy I consider to be reincarnated as a loved and cared for cat would be simply wonderful. I do understand where you are coming from however, but the reality is we have bred (domesticated) certain species to the point where they rely on us for survival - whether or not that is ethical can be debated. Particularly where breeding deliberately causes physical mal-adaptions such as the pushed in faces of Pugs or Persians. Progress is being made - at least we no longer dock puppies tails.

I am sure you agree with Nicky that the export of pets to questionable futures should be stopped forthwith. I received some literature in the mail this morning about this very topic and was disturbed to learn that apparently skinning animals alive produces a "better quality" coat. Hope no-one was enjoying lunch while reading this.

In conclusion, I support greater powers for the RSPCA to control the practice of exporting live animals of all species.

Perhaps it's time for the RSPCA to consider exporting dogmeat instead of letting the 10's of thousands of killed(whoops euthanaised) dogs go to waste. Such a policy may even make people think twice about dumping their pet!
The RSPCA are already part the way to being a feedlot, by having confined animals being supplied food and water in a non-natural environment. It won't be any drama to fed those poor animals a better ration while imprisoned, awaiting death.It's possible they could even have a vertically integrated business with all those abandoned and mistreated horses to deal with.
In doing so hungry mouths would be fed, and fewer dogs would be specifically raised for dogmeat, and more jobs created for our out unemployed meatworkers. A win all round. Certainly the dead dogs won't care. Stop the waste.

Well, you can all relax now, I've stopped holding my breath for an answer to my questions.

Never mind. Next time the subject comes up, I'll try them again.

But in the meantime, pet-lovers, do try and bend your minds to the ethics involved.

Try the old "visitor from Mars" test, and write down your report back to base, describing your observations on the interaction between humans and animals.

What the exercise should illustrate, if you are honest, is the relative moralities of keeping domestic animals in captivity for the span of their natural lives, and the exporting of puppies.

So far, I haven't seen a great deal of self-analysis on this thread, but it doesn't hurt to hope.

Have a nice life, all.

Nicer than all those pets of yours are having, at least.

Pericles

I know you don't agree with the keeping of pets, andal though I disagree that they are slaves, I can understand your reasons. However apart from being rather insulting to everyone who has contributed here, you have not addressed the issue that domesticated animals such as dogs and cats have no place left in the wild (particularly in the Australian ecosystem) yet have no suggestions for what a responsible pet owner should or could do. Should all dogs and cats be exterminated? No-one is forcing you to own a pet - however, you appear to be in denial of the reality of pet ownership.

I have suggested that people be required to obtain a licence, currently we pay councils registration - money from that could go towards educating people in humane treatment and feeding of animals. You have contributed nothing except a self-righteous position (remind you of anyone?) and stated that you are right everyone else is wrong and apparently taken your metaphorical little bat and ball and stomped off. Mind you don't fall over - holding one's nose so high in the air means you miss seeing what is actually going on around you. (No mixed metaphors from yours truly).

Disappointed, expected better.

*However apart from being rather insulting to everyone who has contributed here*

Dearey me Fractelle, you do seem to be a sensitive little petal,
seemingly feeling insulted by anyone who happens to disagree with
you.

What on earth are you doing debating on a forum, if you are so
easily insulted?

A little more rational thinking and focussing on the substance
of the issues, rather then how sensitively they are put to you,
would be a welcome change indeed.

At the end of the day, what is said matters, not how delicately
we treat the sensitive petals on this forum.

Mind you, most of those sensitive petals seem to have no problem
in dishing it out, they just dislike a factual reply to their own
abusive posts. Sorry darling, it won't work.

I am sorry if you feel insulted, Fractelle. I had been particularly careful to address only real, live ethical issues.

>>you have not addressed the issue that domesticated animals such as dogs and cats have no place left in the wild... Should all dogs and cats be exterminated? <<

I have on a previous thread described how pet ownership can be eliminated, but I'm happy to revisit it here.

Clearly, it would not work to suddenly decide that "on January 1st, it will be illegal to keep a pet".

However, it would be realistic to ban the acquisition of domestic animals from January 1st, except where specific need could be shown.

This would be for medical (e.g. guide dog) or commercial (e.g. sheepdog) purposes only, and only when there is no feasible alternative.

New owners would require a licence for one of these categories, renewable every year upon re-justification.

Existing owners can of course keep the pets already in their possession, but would need to register them, and also obtain an appropriate licence. If they don't fall into either commercial or medical categories, they would be issued a "Residual Domestic" licence, which would lapse on the death of the pet.

The process would be managed by the local council. The commercial licence would carry a fee, the "residual pet" licence would carry a smaller, administration-only fee. There would be no fee for "medical" pets.

And in fifteen years or so we would have weaned ourselves off the habit.

All trade in domestic animals would be banned, which would quickly shut off the nastiness that this thread has described. If there is no supply, there can be no international trade, and no cruelty.

But this statement of yours puzzles me a little.

>>however, you appear to be in denial of the reality of pet ownership<<

In what way do I appear in denial? What is the "reality" that I am missing?

My own view is of course that it is pet-owners who are in denial, that keeping animals in captivity is somehow benign.

But I am as always ready to listen.

Pericles

Thank you for your reply.

1. The reality of pet-ownership, is that many people who keep pets do so because of the companionship and the health benefits, such as walking the dog. Medical studies have shown that the company of a pet lowers blood pressure and has positive psychological effects; having worked in a nursing home I have observed first hand the joy that pets brings to patients.

2. Apart from people who abuse animals, which is why I support proper licensing, there is no evidence that pets suffer. We know that animals do suffer when bred in intensive situations like chicken-farms, over-packed into transport for short and long term travel.

3. You are arguing from a position of ideology. I'm not; I have worked as a volunteer at an animal shelter, there is no doubt that these animals suffer; because they have been abandoned by irresponsible owners. Animals that go to good homes go on to live happy healthy lives.

4. The longevity of pets indicates that they are healthy and happy. My last cat lived for eighteen years; we show greater care for pets when they are in pain at the end of their lives than we do to elderly humans.

5. The program of 'weaning' people off pet ownership is a dream, Pericles. People love their pets and I am sure that the reverse is true. We often hear stories of animals saving humans; my old cat alerted me to an intruder one night and we all know of stories where dogs have rescued people from drowning.

I am perplexed by your vehemence on this topic and would appreciate your succinct writing on animal welfare topics like export, inhumane farming practices, inhumane slaughter etc.

I am happy to agree to disagree, I do respect your reasons and the courtesy you have shown to me. I understand how some animal welfare activists try one's patience, however, like atheists, we are not a single homogenised group.

PS Yabby - yet another emotive, patronising ad hominem attack from you to a female poster, same old, same old broken record.

Ok I`m Back. Exciting guys isn`t it!

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2332&page=0


*"AQIS is only enforcing importing rules, not our rules,"

Hugh, what are 'our' rules? Do you mean that an authority that operates under Australian laws and is controlled by us cant be held to account?

The x Ministers advisor fyi Nicky looked two lawyers in the eye and 'assured them; NO dogs were being imported from Australia for such use as food.

This person was an AQIS officer who was sent to be Peters personal assistant when he took over the job of AG Minister to err, show him the ropes.
Hugh can just contact Anne at AQIS and ask her to 'prove nothings going for eating.

She certainly seemed to know him.

Draft a bill Hugh and ask for it to be passed in Senate "urgently."

I`m guessing this has been raised by another Animals Welfare organisation- Yes?



rojo,
Your suggestion to turn Australia into third world by breeding DOGS to feed people is beyond the pale.
Your probably closely related to old Yabbs IMO. Always said it was genetic.

Nicky raised a very important issue.
I hate to see it going to waste instead of us putting some solutions on the table.
Fractelle

We agree with the licence bit but extend it to people also.




Pericles,
The fact is working dogs are often not treated very well especially working farm dogs- some are. In general a working dog does it tougher than a dog sharing a household.
There is nothing wrong with a partnership of friendship and trust between a person and an animals - be it a horse cow dog cat....

We are all on the earth together BUT we need some laws!

I understand some animal lovers become a bit anti people.


I am not sure if you fall under that or your an attention seeking poodle- but if you cant see the difference between Nicky`s dogs and sending dogs overseas to be eaten then you need help imop.

She`s raised an important issue here and imo we should be supporting her not dragging her off field

pale, what makes dogmeat a third world status symbol? Dogmeat is very expensive relative to pork and fowl, and as such is relegated to the consumption of the rich. You may not know that their are millions of people within Asia on what we would consider middle class income.

Do you need me to point out that these dogs are already being killed in our first world economy. I'm merely suggesting that instead of dumping the carcasses they could be utilised to feed those that choose to eat dogmeat. The running costs of the RSPCA could be partially offset by the income, and fewer dogs need be raised for the sole purpose of slaughter.

Fractelle, the "reality of pet ownership" seems a little one-sided.

>>...many people who keep pets do so because of the companionship and the health benefits, such as walking the dog<<

I can see why this is of benefit to people, but I'm not sure it is much of a justification for keeping animals in captivity. It's a bit like saying "many people who export live animals for a living have young families to support". Am I supposed to feel sympathy for the people, or the animals?

>>Apart from people who abuse animals, which is why I support proper licensing, there is no evidence that pets suffer... The longevity of pets indicates that they are healthy and happy.<<

With respect, this is still the "happy darkies" excuse, beloved of Southern slave-owners.

It still didn't make slavery morally right.

>>You are arguing from a position of ideology<<

True. But I'm puzzled that you think that is a bad thing. Unless you start from a point that has some ideological foundation, no argument can survive for long.

>>The program of 'weaning' people off pet ownership is a dream<<

All change begins with the imagination, Fractelle. All I'm asking is "imagine a world where we don't keep domestic pets".

It will happen one day, I promise you.

>>I am perplexed by your vehemence on this topic<<

As indeed I am perplexed, that people who profess to love animals don't see the cruelty involved in keeping domestic pets.

>>some animal welfare activists try one's patience, however, like atheists, we are not a single homogenised group<<

This much is clear.

But I would have thought that there was somewhere a simple foundation of logic upon which all are agreed.

Such as "all cruelty to animals should be eliminated".

Not sure of the point you are making here PALE&IF.

>>working dogs are often not treated very well especially working farm dogs- some are. In general a working dog does it tougher than a dog sharing a household<<

So it was in nineteenth-century Louisiana. Slaves working the cotton fields did it tougher than those in domestic service. Did that make slavery acceptable?

>>There is nothing wrong with a partnership of friendship and trust between a person and an animals - be it a horse cow dog cat<<

Only one half of that partnership is voluntary. Which might it be, do you think?

>>We are all on the earth together BUT we need some laws!<<

Yup. And I think one of those laws should be that the keeping of animals for purely domestic purposes is illegal, on the grounds of cruelty.

>>I understand some animal lovers become a bit anti people... I am not sure if you fall under that or your an attention seeking poodle<<

Eh?

>>if you cant see the difference between Nicky`s dogs and sending dogs overseas to be eaten then you need help imop.<<

Of course I can see a difference. But only in the quantum of cruelty involved. From a moral standpoint, I see no difference. And no-one on this thread has been able to enlighten me as to the ethical difference that they apparently perceive.

Or, more likely, don't care to think about.

>>[Nicky's] raised an important issue here and imo we should be supporting her not dragging her off field<<

She has my full support in any action that reduces cruelty to animals.

Unfortunately, it is my view that the moral foundation for such activism is severely compromised by the blindness exhibited on the topic of domestic pets.

Pericles raised a hypothetical. That is, from January 1st, all pet ownership should be banned due to his perceived enslavement and cruelty to these animals by owners.

What is perplexing about this hypothetical, is that Pericles is not pushing for the same mandatory laws for in excess of 140 million commercial animals where institutionalized enslavement is inflicted on these creatures 24/7 .

If I locked my gate preventing my pets from entry, they would remain outside the gate until I allowed them in - days or weeks could ensue and they would not seek shelter elsewhere. Yet if commercial animals escaped from an intensive farming property, I doubt they would return to that property to seek further enslavement or to endure more despicable acts of cruelty.

Among the list of despicable acts of enslavement and cruelty on commercial animals are: castrations, tail dockings, mulesing, teeth filing, debeaking, ovarectomies and branding (all without pain relievers).

These surgical procedures are performed on enslaved animals. Many are caged so tightly they are unable to turn around. Battery hens are enslaved in areas no larger than an A4 piece of paper. They never see the sun. And let's not forget that Australia likes to enslave, torture and kill its animals in vivisection laboratories - some 6 million during 2004.

What does Pericles recommend for the greyhound industry where Australia is the main player in creating, promoting and encouraging greyhound racing in Asia. Countries such as Korea, China, Vietnam and Macau. Australia is exporting greyhounds to these countries.

There are no provisions made for these dogs when they finish racing in Asia and no chance of re homing. Countries such as Korea and China are notorious for their barbaric illegal thriving trade in dog meat for human consumption.

These enslaved dogs are killed in the cruellest possible ways as many Koreans believe that the rush of adrenalin through the dogs’ body as it dies in agony will increase human virility.

Millions of enslaved greyhound dogs each year are electrocuted, strangled, skinned alive or bludgeoned to death in China and Korea.

What really motivates Pericles?

I may be Robinson Crusoe on this, but the responses so far have not been particularly convincing.

dickie, instead of even attempting to answer the questions, you introduce red herrings.

>>Pericles raised a hypothetical. That is, from January 1st, all pet ownership should be banned<<

I was asked how I would approach the elimination of domestic pets. The hypothetical part is obvious - society simply isn't ready to be confronted with itself in this particular mirror. But once we are, at least someone has thought through the process, so no-one can say "it's impossible to achieve".

>>What is perplexing about this hypothetical, is that Pericles is not pushing for the same mandatory laws for in excess of 140 million commercial animals...<<

You seem to be perfectly capable of doing that yourself, dickie. I was simply providing illumination on the double standards that are operating here. Which, incidentally, you seem unwilling to accept.

Think of it this way. If we as a society had sufficient awareness to understand that keeping domestic animals is inhumane, think how much easier it would be for you to protest about commercial cruelty.

>>What does Pericles recommend for the greyhound industry where Australia is the main player<<

Ban it. It's barbaric. So is horse racing, camel racing etc.

>>What really motivates Pericles?<<

I would have thought it was pretty obvious, dickie.

But I will try to explain again.

While there may be differences in the amount of suffering involved, there is no escaping the fact that the ethical basis for humans to keep domestic pets in perpetual captivity is the same that excuses all forms of cruelty to animals.

Which is, we do it because we can. Animals can't answer back. We choose to kill them when it suits us - from drowning kittens in a sack to "putting down" dogs when they are too old.

My motivation is to highlight the discrepancy between one logic "exporting puppies is bad", and the other "keeping puppies enslaved for the term of their natural life is good".

Does not that make even the slightest sense to you, dickie?

"Does not that make even the slightest sense to you, dickie?"

Not in the slightest Pericles - particularly when you embellish and distort the facts to suit your own weird ideology.

Is there anyone else on this thread who agrees with Pericles?

Errr... that's an interesting allegation, dickie.

>>particularly when you embellish and distort the facts to suit your own weird ideology<<

Which facts have I embellished?

Which facts have I distorted?

And finally, what is the "ideology" that you find so weird?

>>Is there anyone else on this thread who agrees with Pericles?<<

I am not looking for support or agreement here, dickie. Far from it. I know very well the attitude of those who contribute to these threads, and to imagine I would find like-minded folk here would be unrealistic.

What would be useful, though, is for someone to have the courage to address the moral and ethical issues that I raise.

I don't think that's too much to ask, is it?

I have answered all the questions put to me on the subject, openly and fully.

It only remains for you, or Nicky, or PALE&IF, or Cuphandle, or any of your other camp-followers, to direct their attention to the issue instead of hiding from it.

You might learn something about yourselves in the process.

Hi everyone
I've been away in Melbourne so am a bit behind with this. Pericles, I tried to address your questions insofar as I don't really know the answer to them; that is, where is the "line in the sand" to be drawn. I admit also that having my dogs confronts me with the ethical dilemma you describe. Among the reasons for that dilemma is the fact that my dogs are carnivorous and I am therefore making a contribution of sorts to the cruelty of livestock farming. Fundamentally perhaps it is the wrong thing to do, but you mentioned the quantum of cruelty.

I do take issue with your contention that it's okay for medical or commercial purposes, however. If you want to put the line in the sand over "pets", and in that description I include dogs and cats, then should it not be all or nothing? Greyhounds are kept for "commercial" purposes just as sheep dogs are. I have a particular dislike of birds being kept in cages for any purpose including "companionship".

Returning to the quantum of cruelty, my view is that we should attack the worst of the cruelties first; those being factory farming, the export of any live animal for any purpose, animals used in "entertainment" and vivisection. So let's go back to the fundamental question - it is cruelty we are considering here, and look at each of the ethical issues as we find them.

More later.
Nicky

“Ban it. It's barbaric. So is horse racing, camel racing etc.” Very good Pericles. However, you appear to have remained silent on the issue of the barbaric treatment of sheep, cattle, pigs or battery hens, therefore, I must presume that you meant to include these in your ban too?

The matter of responsible pet ownership by owners who have a deep affection for their animals appears to be beyond your comprehension. These pets are not enslaved.

As I have mentioned, try getting rid of an animal you have treated kindly. Those pets who have fled their owners tell another story. No pet will flee a kindly owner, however, your ideology has not altered at all from the one you presented months ago and I believe you are all the poorer for it.

Perhaps your skills would be better utilised by lobbying against the human species who enslave and brutalise their women? Thousands of these women end up in refuge centres in Australia too. Then of course, "the morality of a nation can be judged by the way it treats its animals" eh?

Regulation of pet ownership is pathetic and therein lies the problem. Animal cruelty laws need a serious overhaul. Elevated fees and a short term TAFE accreditation course, together with the sterilisation of all pets by six months of age and yard and housing inspections should be mandatory as a starting point, to mitigate pet ownership by cretins.

Enforcement of new laws would see a significant reduction in pet ownership. However, when one reads of some dozen or so cruelty prosecutions annually regarding pet ownership, one cannot compare that with the institutionalized heinous brutality perpetrated with impunity, on millions of enslaved, commercial animals.

However, laws to prevent cruelty to pets do exist but the law permits cruelty and enslavement of commercial animals. Therefore, if you want to persist with your bans, shouldn’t they first be imposed where cruelty and enslavement is most prevalent, which happens to be the legalised torture and captivity of commercial animals?

I reiterate, what is your agenda and what is your “illumination” point?

The facts of the matter are quite simple,....cruelty is being perpetrated every single day upon animals of all types and species.

Those members of society who do NOT have affinity with animals can never be converted to the situation of accepting empathy with any of the species,....it is a human trait which is born into us, NOT created, consequently these empathy-lacking members of society should NOT be allowed to own or be involved in any form of occupation that puts them in close contact with animals.

Strict rules regarding animal ownership (to poorly coin a phrase)should be implemented by all authorities, ensuring that the care and maintenance of all types of animals is allowed by genuinely caring persons ONLY, with severe penalties enshrined in animal welfare rules and regulations.....Any person or persons who have been found responsible for acts of cruelty against animals should NEVER be allowed to obtain any further animals regardless of their individual situation!

The only way to stamp out cruelty is by the administration of very harsh financial penalties and public humiliation campaigns, directed openly by the community against the perpetrators of these heinous crimes.

Watch for the increased dumping of Christmas pets as we enter the New Year period and all the unthinking parents find that they cannot afford to feed their newly aquired pets!

Every Dog and Cat should be compulsorily registered, chipped and sterilized shortly after birth and severe penalties should be applied to all owners who refuse or fail to have their animals sterilized by humane means (eg: Government Vets). Exceptions would apply where a dog or cat is classed as breeding stock, however Breeding Licences would be required to prove exemption.

Excellent post Cuphandle. We really need to get serious about who can keep animals as pets.

I believe that birds should be excluded (as pets) too - the only cage large enough for our avian brethren is the sky itself.

However, mammals like dogs and cats have home territories and enjoy company - cats are not nearly as solitary as some people like to think.

Now Pericles I know you can give plenty of examples of owner cruelty - so can I. Although I thought while I wrote about increased life-span of pets that you'd retort with 'slave-owner' mentality and you did. Nonetheless, a long healthy life-span does reflect good mental and physical health and figured it was worthwhile stating.

I think about the animals I have shared my life with and wonder where the evidence of cruelty is - of which you speak. I am a very perceptive empathic person, can always tell if an animal is unwell. My old cat would always snuggle into me closer than usual if he was unwell. My current cats will sit outside waiting for me if I am late home - even if it is raining. I'm sure you are aware of a cat's distaste for water.

What I am trying to get at is how do you know that my pets are slaves? How could their lives be made better than what they are at present?

Cuphandle, that was excellent comment. Those who keep pigs and chickens currently in the grossly abusive conditions they do should be exposed to the public, as should those convicted of any cruelty offences (have a look at a website I found www.stoptac.org and go to The Law - that's what has been done there).

Fractelle, I'm with you. I think that I can state with certainly that my dogs do not consider themselves to be "enslaved" (more the reverse, if anything). PALE made a valid comment too; that farm dogs certainly do it tougher than "pet" dogs. We're back to that "line in the sand".

I think that "registered breeders" also require closer scrutiny, since they are undoubted contributors to the 200,000 dogs needlessly destroyed every year, and the so-called "designer" breeds are a whole new curse. The numbers of these breeders should be limited and their establishments inspected at least quarterly.

No live animal should be exported for any purpose.

Pericles, you remain silent on the "enslavement" of factory farmed animals, or animals bred for food generally (all these places should be open to the public, and should be able to be photographed and filmed; that would put some of the worst atrocities under scrutiny, and possibly encourage people to make more humane choices about what food they buy). Why is that? Is the pet thing a red herring?

Nicky

In philosophical terms, Pericles is of course absolutaly correct,
but few pet owners think about life to that extent.

Alot of pets might well like their owners, but so did alot of
slaves.

Fact is that these creatures have been trained from day 1, that
their owner is their only way to make a living. The more they
wag their tails and snuggle up to their owners, the more food
is the result. They are not silly :)

They are of course acting out of self interest, as does every other
creature.

So for how long would these "pets" stick around, if you stopped
feeding them?

Nicky,
"No live animal should be exported for any purpose."

So a family migrating to another country can't take their cherished pet? No future Irish/Japanese/NZ Melbourne Cup winners?

While "grossly abusive" means different things to different people, i too believe that animals should be raised in such a way that the producer is happy to display his/her practices to the public. If the producer is ashamed of any aspect they really aren't effecting best practice in their animal husbandry. Sure there will be those for whom best practice won't be enough, and quite likely never will be, but they weren't buying much product anyway.

A content animal is a productive one, there's no way around it. Buyers don't want poor stock, and poor stock are what you get if they are abused

Quite frankly I dont think Rojo or his friend Perciles are playing with a full deck of cards.

How you two can compare much cared for family members and the cruelty of intensive farming or Live Animal Exports is beyond me.

Ok lets say we adopted the idea of no pets.

RIGHT

That`s done !!
\
Now can we move on to discuss the topic on this thread. Exporting puppies and dogs that may be boiled alive in a pot.

Now do we have your support for that TOO

Or is it just your self hatred that drives you to pick on Nickys and Dickies good intentions.

Whats really your problem.

Does their compassion made you feel ashamed by the lack of yours!

Believe me- it should .

"So for how long would these "pets" stick around, if you stopped
feeding them?"

Just as long as the children on the streets Yabby, who have been reduced to begging.

"They are of course acting out of self interest, as does every other
creature."

You are one sick bastard Yabby - a coldly rational reject this country took in and whose callous and arrogant indifference to the plight of others has corrupted this forum beyond belief.

Though rest assured it is not just the evil of men like yourself which this nation needs to guard against but the weaknesses and faults we have in our social order, which you promote with sadistic relish.

It is glaringly obvious that on this forum, you are in good company. From the thousands of participants who debate on this forum, only three or four advocate for the humane treatment of the animals you regard as vermin.

From the school of hard knocks, I have shared my life with academics to alcoholics - all who have a code of ethics and morality which is beyond your intellectual capacity.

You are a useless idiot who wears a thin mask of sanity and who claims to have access to higher knowledge but seeks capital only for himself, driven by unrestrained greed.

Do not bother with your usual nauseating retorts Yabby - I am no longer at my post - a happy release from your toxic emissions.

Dickie
We have to learn to play by their rules. I was not surprised you were the only poster to seem to catch on to the very clear push towards Live Exports with the Movie Australia.
This is like the AWB all over again. We can’t afford to ‘miss’ these opportunities.
It took 5 years of us inviting others to join our work with Muslim Leaders to phase out live exports. Even then instead of coming to a well informed team of lawyers and others who knew who was who in the zoo they just had to try to meet them without those lawyers. The results have been a disaster for the animals with one of the main Muslims Leaders about to walk away from the position dealing with Halal. Or is that what you were actually trying to achieve Mr Wirth?

And People wonder WHY people like Yabby are thriving.
No Dickie I am not having a go at you or Cup handle or Nicky.

I am just sick to death of the attitude that if it’s raised by pale- Don’t support it.

Animals Australia and Animal Liberation need to point out that this Movie Nicole was in were to promote Tourism to our country AND that was all about Live Exports TODAY.
Honestly you need a better leader than Glenys IMO.
So who`s drawing up the bill for Dr Wirth to have things changed with AQIS re exporting dogs?
Who raised this issue in the first place?
Probably PAACT Or Lyn or Mark P
Whoever it was good on them
Can we now discuss what`s being done to change this law everybody instead of rising to the bait of Rojo Perciles and Yabby.

Cant you see they do it on purpose to keep us off the real matters raised by Nicky in this thread.
Just ignore them and talk about the changes to the law and what RSPCA National are doing about it.

I must admit that your reactions to being posed such a simple ethical dilemma don't particularly surprise me.

Although it is somewhat disappointing that some of you choose to impugn my motives, rather than address the question.

Nicky was at least honest enough to admit there is a question that needs airing.

>>I don't really know the answer to them; that is, where is the "line in the sand" to be drawn. I admit also that having my dogs confronts me with the ethical dilemma you describe.<<

...but then realizes she must toe the party line...

>>Is the pet thing a red herring?<<

dickie tries for the usual diversion:

>>you appear to have remained silent on the issue of the barbaric treatment of sheep, cattle, pigs or battery hens, therefore, I must presume that you meant to include these in your ban too?<<

I am against any form of cruelty to animals, I thought I had made that crystal clear.

In fact, it is that very concept that underpins my disgust that our society allows the keeping of domestic pets.

>>The matter of responsible pet ownership by owners who have a deep affection for their animals appears to be beyond your comprehension. These pets are not enslaved.<<

Then exactly how do you define slavery, dickie?

And yet another diversion:

>>try getting rid of an animal you have treated kindly<<

I am not advocating that you turn them loose dickie. Just that you break the habit. Like giving up smoking or drinking, it's saying no to the next one that matters.

Fractelle, I thought we had agreed to differ.

>>What I am trying to get at is how do you know that my pets are slaves? How could their lives be made better than what they are at present?<<

I'm sure you make their captivity very pleasant, Fractelle. But it is still captivity.

PALE&IF just insults.

>>I dont think Rojo or his friend Perciles are playing with a full deck of cards.<<

Predictable, but not particularly clever.

It is obvious that you feel uncomfortable with the topic.

So I'll keep going.

PALE&IF, you have carefully avoided answering even a single one of my questions.

Instead, you make petulant remarks like

>>Ok lets say we adopted the idea of no pets. RIGHT That`s done!!<<

The idea of "no pets" should actually follow an acceptance that it is an evil practice, and demeans us as human beings. So, can we try for that first?

>>Now can we move on to discuss the topic on this thread. Exporting puppies and dogs that may be boiled alive in a pot. Now do we have your support for that TOO Or is it just your self hatred that drives you to pick on Nickys and Dickies good intentions.<<

It would help if you actually exercised your thinking muscles before posting such tripe, PALE&IF.

I abhor cruelty to animals. I do not support the export of puppies for any purpose. The existence of puppy-farms appalls me.

As a logical extension of the same principles, I think that people who keep animals enslaved as pets are major contributors to the underlying problem, which is, that we have historically treated animals badly, simply because we are stronger. It's the caveman thing. Me got big club, you got small head.

Apart from anything else, you leave yourself wide open to accusations of hypocrisy, when you froth...

>>From the thousands of participants who debate on this forum, only three or four advocate for the humane treatment of the animals you regard as vermin<<

My assumption, of course, is that you count yourself as one of the "three or four". And - with some twisted and thoroughly arbitrary logic - count my anti-pet stance as... what? Pro-cruelty?

How do you work that out?.

>>Cant you see they do it on purpose to keep us off the real matters raised by Nicky in this thread.<<

Pure self-delusion.

My simple response to that is "Can't you see that PALE&IF and Nicky and dickie and Fractelle are obfuscating on purpose to keep us off the real issue raised by Pericles?"

Try thinking it through sometime.

What you discover might just surprise you.

*You are one sick bastard Yabby *

Deary me Dickie, you really did have a bad hair day! But that is
not unusual for the emotionally engulfed, so you have an excuse.
You can't help yourself and at your age, you are perhaps too
old to learn.

I remind you of the quote which triggered your outburst:-

"They are of course acting out of self interest, as does every other
creature."

So are you denying my claim? I remind you of the huge amount
of knowledge that we have accumulated about this topic. Have
you ever taken the time to understand the basics of evolutionary
psychology?

I remind you of the reasons why altruism and reciprocal altruism
evolved in the first place.

I remind you that you fell in love, because of how a person made
YOU feel. I remind you that you had children, to satisfy your
hormonal/maternal needs. Your self interest was involved.

I remind you that even when you do your good deed for the day and
feel great because of it, the reward chemistry of your brain
is making you feel good, so you have a reason to do it. Again
its in your self interest to feel good.

But I suspect that all of this is well beyond you Dickie, ok
fair enough.

Rojo. certainly no Irish/NZ/Japanese Melbourne Cup winners. In Pericles' terminology, few animals are more enslaved than racehorses - horse racing is animal abuse, not a "sport". Again with reference to Pericles, do people who want to move to another country consider the effect of travel and quarantine on their "much loved pet"?

I would suggest to everyone that if we totally ignore the mindless rubbish inflicted upon us by Yabby, he might go away - in other words, stop responding to him at all. Even slow learners like him will eventually get the message. If he cannot debate in any other form than insults, he does not deserve responses.

Pericles, I do understand your position (I'd be interested to hear what you eat regarding meat, milk, eggs, etc though), and as I have said, there are times that I deplore what I think is my own hypocrisy. I console myself with the reflection that my dogs (and I prefer the term guardian) would have been killed had I not taken them. And there is little doubt that they are happy creatures.

But to extend your thoughts further, we could say that children are the slaves of their parents, could we not (until the age when they can escape parental confines; then in later life parents often get their revenge when they are old)? How far do we take this notion? Employees enslaved by employers? Wives/husbands enslaved?

Nicky

Pericles,

If Australia banned all pets in domestic homes that would have no affect what so ever to the issue raised in this thread.

In fact it would ‘increase cruelty to domestic animals given there would be no competition in market.

It would place dogs in the same position as cattle sheep goat’s horses etc are right now.

If you have listened to Yabby’s argument you will know his defence of exporting animals alive is the lack of competition.

So there would be no choice between going to live with Nicky or Dickey or Cup handle etc – All dogs and pups would be exported to be bashed to death and eaten.

In a tiny room in the back of a restaurant beaten to death with sticks and thrown off the walls. Then skinned and dropped into boiling water all while still alive.

If I were a pup I know where I would prefer to be sent.

On a personal note I would like to say I find your posts insulting and offensive towards Nicky especially regarding her dogs. You must be aware she spends much of her free time working to improve Animal Welfare. I think your posts are almost unkind towards her or leaning towards cruel.

Yabby

I take it then you approve of Australia breeding dog’s puppies to live export for meat+ of course slaughtering dogs in Australia and exporting dog meat.
Have I got that right?

So do you know the company names exporting dogs ?. You either know or you don’t know.

Btw did you know men have a much greater drive to reproduce than women?
Apparently its one of the most basic drives within a male.

I agreed with you in many of your comments in the past because I understand the plight of many farmers.
However you do not represent the average farmers. You imo represent the corporate companies that have betrayed the farmers and run them off their farms to be replaced with intensive farming and feed lots.

I thought you were straight up and told it like it is.

disappointing

Dickey Nicky

For what it is worth. Here is the person who told us there were NO dogs being exported through AQIS to Asia etc about eighteen months ago while working as advisor for the X Minister of Ag

http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:ehSTypAPQPcJ:www.daffa.gov.au/__data/assets/word_doc/0010/817777/reg-plan-planned-0809.doc+anne+mcdonald+aqis&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=au

http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:NE9TvpWxqfoJ:www.daffa.gov.au/__data/assets/p

http://www.daff.gov.au/aqis/about/structure
http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=anne+mcdonald+aqis+&btnG=Google+Search&meta=cr%3DcountryAU

Perhaps Dr Wirth might be concerned by what seems a deliberate attempt to mislead IMO.

Perhaps he could use this to open an enquiry into AQIS misleading the public imo.

Two of the people at that table were lawyers although I dont think she was aware of that at the time

Nicky, thanks for your last post.

But do please have a word to PALE&IF, who seems totally unprepared to accept that there is any form of ethical challenge in the keeping of domestic pets.

If a tenth of the effort she dedicates to waffle, changing the subject and blaming the messenger was spent in thinking through the problem, it might be worth further discussion.

Have a great day.

Pericles

*But do please have a word to PALE&IF, who seems totally unprepared to accept that there is any form of ethical challenge in the keeping of domestic pets.*

Pericles

This topic certainly is worth discussion but not more so than the topic raised on this thread.

I have explained that your idea no matter how well intended would only put dogs on the same list as farm animals to be exported alive for food and grown for food.

These are two different matters.

I feel Nickys concerns must be dealt with first..

Anyway I am unsure if I will get back to post before the 25th depending where I am so

Seasons Greeting to AL

Thre is a common thread, though, PALE&IF

>>This topic certainly is worth discussion but not more so than the topic raised on this thread<<

The point that I was trying to get across in my first post, in which I clearly failed miserably, was to suggest that if we didn't have such a thriving market for dogs-as-pets, it would be far easier to clamp down on the trade of dogs-for-export.

Secondary to that point, but linked closely with it, were the double standards involved in a society that smiled upon on, and frowned on the other.

And who's AL, anyway?

>>Seasons Greeting to AL<<

Pericles, thank you. I think AL might have been meant to be "all" - if not, possibly Animal Liberation. I have no difficulty with your questions, I just wish I had a better (and more consistent) answer for them.

On a fundamental level your theory is of course absolutely right. If people did not keep dogs as pets there would be no market for them, and no place for the abominations that are "puppy mills", backyard breeders, and hapless animals sold by pet shops. But what to do with the dogs already here then becomes an issue. (Victoria is currently using leghold (steel-jawed) traps on dogs who have been abandoned and become wild).

I'm still curious about your thoughts about keeping animals for other commercial purposes though - food, "entertainment" (rodeos, circuses etc).

PALE, I couldn't find anything relevant to this thread in those links you provided - just the names of some people employed by AQIS. What were we meant to find?

Nicky

Pericles,

Nicky was correct. AL Was ALL Typo error sorry. But Seasons greeting to AL to who ever he is.

Btw I have NO problem if there are no domestic animals. (No animals no cruelty)

Could pls you let us know if you think its ok to breed for food?

*PALE, I couldn't find anything relevant to this thread in those links you provided - just the names of some people employed by AQIS. What were we meant to find?*

Just pointing out her role in AQIS and connection to AVA. The fact that AVA suddenly failed to attend without notice.
Peter sent her to discuss co joint Halal farms working direct with ME and Aussie farmers but she wouldn’t discuss it AT ALL. A Ministers advisor is “supposed” to support “all” players in an industry not just one. She sat there for two hours praising live exports.
Her support for live exports, her connection, to AQIS, AVA, warrants a closer imop.



Her statement that Hugh had only two days prior visited Peter r with Allan to pledge their ongoing 'support' for live exports.

I mean that would have been a pretty big event in Animal Welfare for public interest if RSPCA President flew all the way from UK.

If he came to meet in person with the Australian Minister of Ag along with the president of WSPA to (strongly) state their case ‘against’ live exports and to launch the national fund raiser for Ban Live Exports campaign- that would be something we should of heard about wouldn’t it?

I didn’t see any media releases to that effect did you?
Just passing idle comments on fyi

http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:MRQuo4L6rhIJ:www.outdoorlife.net.au/LinkClick.asp

FYI

http://www.thewest.com.au/default.aspx?MenuID=28&ContentID=112970

You must be pleased PETA are opening in Australia.

But PALE, how long ago was all this? Are these people still in those jobs? Certainly AQIS could do with a review, and not just for those reasons. Inaccurate statistics are another.

Handle with Care has been up and running for quite some time now, and there is plenty of media information there.

Nicky

Every time I see "so and so wants more control" I see the words shouting back at me

"Someone wants more power to restrict what you are allowed to do"

Before I gave the RSPCA or any other NGO or Government department any more "power" I would first ask

How well have they discharged the powers they presently have?

Will their intercession in the free transactions of individuals actually benefit anyone or any thing?

Making regulations for do-gooders to beat other folk over the head with adds nothing to the overall quality of life of poeple or critters.

Simply because Hugh Wurth "demands", is not a good reason for anyone to accede to those demands.

Nicky
Not that long ago. Around a month prior to the elections.

Its worth knowing if Hugh and Alan attended a meeting with the then Minister of Agriculture and pledged to continue their 'support' for Live Exports.
Pls note her words, not mine.

We should find out if Alan flew over to Australia at around that time and if so did they meet with Peter. If they did what took place at that meeting...

If its untrue true and no meeting took place then think we deserve to know why' Anne Lied.

*Handle with Care has been up and running for quite some time now, and there is plenty of media information there*

Your missing my point. *IF they met with ANY Minister and 'support' for live exports -( at the same time launching RSPCA fund raiser for Ban Live Exports) then people should want to know about it.

Where is Anne now you ask? No idea but probably not too far from AVA AQIS and Live Exports IMO.- Or perhaps real Estate and bio.



http://annemcdonald.harcourts.com.au/27,Community+Information.aspx

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=bowen+movie+australia+nicole+&btnG=Google+Search&meta=cr%3DcountryAU

Col

Fair comment. . It’s a difficult act to juggle. On one hand RSPCA are the leading Animal Welfare Authorities so we would expect Hugh to be outraged by breeding factories being allowed to operate here in Australia to export puppies for food.
From what I have heard of him I don’t think he would support that at all.
If he wasn’t complaining we should be even more worried.
I am not sure if he’s a control freak or he has been controlled in the past either.

I guess what the public really want to know is what else are Hugh and RSPCA National going to do about puppy factories in Australia breeding to export for food.

What will RSPCA DO about this if given more power?

Will they perhaps hand back the power to the DPI under State Government MOU leaving it up to the Government to control this as has been done with farm animals.
This is mostly the case with farm animals
Some times people can be mislead about RSPCA. They do some wonderful things for dogs and cats with the help of the public who volunteer their time. RSPCA inspectors and CEOs wages are made up by grants from both federal and state Governments for their wages cars holidays etc.
I think you will find each CEO is actually employed by RSPCA National.
Given RSPCA Nationals close ties with MOUs to DPI and Governments your quite right when you say lets find out more before passing any more powers imo..

We may be making progress, Nicky.

(and the reference to AL was just a tease - I had guessed the intent)

>>But what to do with the dogs already here then becomes an issue.<<

As I mentioned before, the Pericles Plan would be to eliminate the problem at its source - no new pets. The problem you describe wouldn't change a bit, abandoned pets are abandoned pets. Since they do not come under the heading "new pets" I would imagine that someone would be found to look after them for the span of their natural life, just as occurs today.

>>I'm still curious about your thoughts about keeping animals for other commercial purposes though - food, "entertainment" (rodeos, circuses etc).<<

If you would allow me a little latitude here, to separate out entertainment from food for the time being.

I would fully support the abolition, at the same time as the ban on new domestic pets, of events that exploit animals such as rodeos, circuses, even those zoos that do not satisfactorily fulfill an animal conservation or sanctuary mission.

I have never understood the attraction of seeing animals "perform", nor of seeing them in captivity for the amusement of humans. The first time I went to a zoo was when I was nine, and I still haven't been able to forget the look in their eyes.

Total, empty, unadulterated despair.

I would still, however, put animals-for-food in a different category to keeping animals for our personal amusement.

Although fully justifying that last line to myself is still a work-in-progress, I will admit.

Hi Pericles,
Thanks for that. You have set my mind at rest. My hypocrisy rears its ugly head again though about how much I would miss having my dogs in my life, and how sad I would be, but ethically your position is the right one. But then do we take it that step further and determine that no food animals should be bred for captivity, and food?

Your story reminded me of the story someone told me about the last Tasmanian Tiger (Thylacine), who died in abject misery in a zoo.

What of the zoos (such as Western Plains at Dubbo) which claim they are breeding to prevent the extinction of threatened species? Where do we draw these lines in the sand? Should we allow nature to take its course (survival of the fittest)? I have a moral objection to the amount of filming of human interference with wild animals that goes onto Animal Planet, for example. How many times do these people need to film animals ripping other animals to bits? We know it goes on, but what sort of people want to watch it over and over again?

I have always accepted the proposition that animals are here for their own reasons, they have self-interest, and an immeasurable capacity to suffer as the human animal does. They are not here for human exploitation in any form.

Nicky

Nicky & Pericles

Excellent summary of topic. I too feel compromised with my love and need for animal companions. There is no easy answer.

I looked at the above name you gave the topic, Nicky; "RSPCA wants more control over exported puppies". In this often cruel world someone has to regulate the export of animals, if not the RSPCA who should be responsible?

Thank you for giving me much to consider.

Fractelle
Whilst I agree with all of the avove. Arn`t we going round in circles here.
The problem with that is we have already established the fact RSPCA have no control over live animal exports.

No staff, no powers with most of these codes being self regulated and RSPCAs having MOUs with DPI state Governments.

We agree RSPCA SHOULD have more control and the funds to employ the insepectors to police 'without interfearance' from State and Federal Governments.

Now thats unlikely when you consider AQIS are Government and 'control it.
As well there is always a possibly conflict of interest when you consider all CEOs and Inspectors wages are made up between State and Federal Governments including cars holidays etc.

Do I have the answers. No I dont. There are some wonderful people working within RSPCA and many of them close friends so its important you dont think I am knocking RSPCA in general because they do a wonderful job under hard conditions.

I am however drawing attention to the STRUCTURE of RSPCA National.

To Whom are these boards answerable to? Before we give more powers.

Ok Hugh if you get these powers how are you going to police them?

OR are you going to hand it over to DPI State Governments under another cloud of a MOUS between RSPCA and DPIs?

fractelle "if not the RSPCA who should be responsible"

Good question

imho

the person who breeds the puppies for export is the one who is most directly engaged and has gone to the effort.

Whilst a minority of those involved might be uncaring, to be motivated to do anything means an interest and I tend to believe in the goodness of people.

If you cannot regulate something EFFECTIVELY then we should not pretend that regulation for its own sake produces any benefits.

All it does is to focus power and authority into the hands of those who might be more corrupt than those they are regulating...

Any number of Victorian Vehicle Licencing staff (selling off vehicle ID's to the rebirthing industry), Council Building inspectors and (from recent events in USA) SEC inspectors serve as good examples and that is before we even get to politicians in public office.

Nicky
Just quickly before I leave I would like to point out to you that PETA base their pitch pretty much at pop or movie stars.( Which is if course their business.)

Its amazing you never seem to have the 'slightest problem 'with that and yet- when we point out something thats very much to do with Australia its suddenly different.=?

Now its all a matter of 'taste I guess, but encouraging young ones and females to be seen as the sexist= see peta= Doesnt really make US feel too happy either!!=

* Are You the Sexiest Vegetarian Next Door?
We've announced the winners of the Sexiest Vegetarian Soldier contest, and now it's your turn to enter our annual Sexiest Vegetarian Next Door contest! If you have what it takes to be named the sexiest vegetarian in all the land, you'll receive a free trip for two to Hawaii. Enter *

From: "PETA" <newsmanager@peta.org>
To
Subject: PETA E-News: Are You the Sexiest Vegetarian Next Door?
Date: Friday, 19 December 2008 10:04 AM

PETA E-News

Urge Britney Spears to Give Exotic Animals a Break
In Britney's new music video "Circus," lions and elephants are
forced to perform humiliating and unnatural tricks. Please urge
Britney to leave animals out of her future music videos,
concerts, television performances, and promotions.
[http://getactive.peta.org/ct/P1NMdxn1fYiD/]

Col Rouge

You are a man of surprises and absolutely correct of course.

Nicky I don’t have the answers but let’s not pretend everything’s in order because its one huge mess.

If we get a few more people involved we might be able to come up with something- who knows.

Unemotional good advice is rather short around Animal Welfare.


It’s too big for us and too well entrenched. Their is real truth in what he’s warning you about.

Handing out more powers until we know how those powers would be used isn’t wise.

Ok Hugh has requested more powers- to do what anybody know?

Does he seriously think he can police this?

He knows full well despite the fact it’s controlled by AQIS he doesn’t have the staff.

So why isn’t he asking for all puppy factories to be banned?

Or to Ban puppies being exported off shore.

Or To have a paper trail as to where each puppy is going.

Why just more power?

Does anybody know anything more other than what is in the media R

There didn’t seem to be much info there .

I already raised the issue of the x Ministers advisor informing us in the presence of lawyers that Hugh along with the UK RSPCA CEO pledged their ongoing support live exports to then then Minister.

This is a serious concern and it should be for Hugh himself. Either Anne got it wrong or it happened.

fyi Nicky this was sent to AA so I am even more concerned you don’t know what I am talking about.




I dont print things that didnt happen because I know Hughs passion for Slater and Gorden. Now this DID happen so ask yourself why it wasnt followed up on.

Pls try hard to follow what I am concerned about.

Use your imagination maybe.
Happy Christmas to all.

PALE, I really cannot see the most remote relativity between the way PETA campaigns and what you're talking about (assuming you mean Kidman and Jackman). They did not "promote" anything - they acted in a MOVIE. Nothing more.

I personally think the "sex" stereotyping campaigns are a little lacking in taste, but it clearly works for PETA. But did PALE not stage some nude protest at some point?

As for your second post, how on earth would I know anything about something you sent to Animals Australia? I am not in its confidence. I also find it a bit of a leap that even Wirthless would do something as stupid as "pledging support for live exports" (who, by the way. is Alan?). It would be more than what his job was worth (even if he is only the Victorian President), and I think you should ask HIM if it's true. You have claimed here that it is, and that is of concern. If it isn't, then take it up with the AQIS woman - if she is still there. Whatever, it's a long time ago. There are new people and new battles to be fought over this, and re-hashing stuff the former government did really is a waste of time.

That's all for now, Col, I'll come back to your comments a bit later. Fractelle, thank you for your kind words.

Nicky

Nicky



Firstly Merry Christmass and goodbye. After having said that I am guessing your pretty much like me when it comes to slaughtering millions of Animals in celibration of anything.

Ar where`s Yabby ( A rare insight)

Also personal thanks for year 2007 for your kind words and understanding when I lost my friend.

Dont tell Pericles but my sister gave me a puppy for my birthday.

We will have to agree to dissagree about the funds spent to promote Australian Tourism and watch Bowen and live exports.

The films been given the thumbs down by fellow actors. I heard a rumour PETA had a bit to do with that. If its true than I say God Bless PETA.
IMOP think Nicole does support live exports but time will tell.

*But did PALE not stage some nude protest at some point?*

No Nicky, never nude. Dressed Strippers to highlight to the Australian people that the Money to SH was not just wheat but blood money from the cruelty of live exports because Howard ,Rudd RSPCA Animals Australia Andrew would not disclose this very important fact.
http://www.livexports.com/cowgun.html

*As for your second post, how on earth would I know anything about something you sent to Animals Australia?* *I am not in its confidence.*

Nicky everyone should be informed if we informed 'them.'

Just like the Australian public should have been told by Rudd RSPCA or Animals Australia about AWB being Live Animal Exporters.

So why didnt any of these organisations disclose this 'fact?

You understand at last why we post.

You keep asking me who is Allan- I keep telling you the CEO of RSPCA UK.

I think animal welfare would greatlty benefit by opening it up to more people like Col. Hes not over the top with a fair handle on how the system is played.

Try to keep him commenting on this thread if its poosible and listen carefully to what hes saying.

Not that I guess he has the answers but he at least understands the problem.

PALE” Col Rouge

You are a man of surprises and absolutely correct of course.”

Thankyou for your comment PALE,

Although I hope it was not me being “absolutely correct” which was the surprise : -)

“I think animal welfare would greatlty benefit by opening it up to more people like Col. Hes not over the top with a fair handle on how the system is played.”

Yes I understand exactly “how the system is played” and it is not how it should be

We would all benefit better from Smaller government, not bigger, regardless how benevolent a big brother he would paint himself to be.

- Stalin showed the world what happens when you have incontestably big government making incontestable regulations.

We only ever benefit from good regulation, never from bad

A recurring theme in my threads promotes less regulation and more personal discretion (to make the choices pertinent to ourselves) in our daily lives.

I will keep beating that drum : - )

PALE, like you, I see nothing to celebrate in the human bloodlust for animals over Christmas and I am glad I'm not part of it. And I imagine Animals Australia disseminates information according to whatever its policies are, on a who needs to know and who wants to know and how confidential it is basis, not to mention legal considerations.

Col, this was the additional content of the article which I had to leave out because of wordcount restrictions"-

"AQIS is only enforcing importing rules, not our rules," said RSPCA president Dr Hugh Wirth. "At the moment we have no breakdown of puppies being consigned to pet shops or brokers or puppy farms and those which are going to be reunited with their owners.

"Quite simply the law has to change and pets should come under the normal export requirements for animals."

This would mean authorities would know exact numbers of animals being exported, and where and why they were shipped.

Tens of thousands of puppies born in intensive breeding farms in Victoria have been exported to Singapore and Hong Kong. According to the quarantine and inspection service, 10,400 dogs — both companion and commercial animals — were exported in the 2007-08 financial year".

With your argument for less rather than more regulation, what our esteemed Mr Wirth is proposing is just that - including companion animals in the existing regulations.

That said, it somewhat escapes me why he is the person commenting on behalf of the national body.

Nicky

Col Rouge
Apologies just returned from the bush

I think you have been around the traps and that’s precisely what’s required.

Most people think animal’s welfare is a small issue but behind the scene it’s a multi trillion dollars industry where corruption flows like wine.


I agree with a much small Government. IMO if we encourage the communities to jump their local councillors and appoint a board instead of being bullied it would be a good place to start. Perhaps then people will finally understand they do have the power to make changes. From there it might give them to confidence to dump the state Governments and demand real people to represent their concerns in federal government. With the world wide recession it might be a good place to start by encouraging people not to waste funds by giving two Governments our public purse to splurge on parties trips…

If you are going to be around this thread I would like to share and ask thoughts on some events that have taken place since we launched a small group called PALE.
As your independent and looking at things with a broader view it might give me the opportunity to explain some of our concerns..

We are an independent small group of people grass roots people from mixed back grounds each with a love of animals a sense of fair play and deep concerns about the political correctness of some of the head animal’s representatives.
It would be good to kick a few facts about and ask you for you opinions if you had any

Hello Nicky

I found myself thinking of you on Christmas day. (Invited the new neighbours the Buddhist monks they are building a monastery slowly)

There is something nice about sitting on Christmas day surrounded by cows and their calves with only people who see them as fellow living creatures and hold respect for them.

I did think of you and wished for a moment you could be there to join in the feeling of utter peace and good will if only for a few hours.

To your comments.

*And I imagine Animals Australia ….

Umm, well perhaps others require knowing what guidelines are to be followed- don’t you think? Then we would all know what to, and not to send.



*"AQIS is only enforcing importing rules, not our rules,"*
Australia and AQIS according to Anne do not and have not exported dogs to Asia.

*That said, it somewhat escapes me why he is the person commenting on behalf of the national body.*

Yes it’s interesting but perhaps we could once again point out he also was head of Handle with Care.

Do you not find it strange that peak animal welfare heads agreed to this considering the years and years of complaining about the man.?

Thanks, PALE, I had a lovely peaceful Christmas (that was after almost every appliance in the house broke down and had to be replaced).

I have always said that I don't know how Wirthless became the spokesperson for Handle with Care, and I don't know what Animals Australia's policies are about receiving/using/disseminating information. I would think they would be very careful about whom they released a lot of information to, however - as you said, corruption is manifest particularly when government agencies are involved.

I asked AMSA which were the live export ships that were prohibited from loading a couple of months ago over failing to meet pollution requirements - and it has to be a formal FOI request and you have to pay for the information. That sort of information should be released in the public interest. But I'll send them the money and see what comes back.

Perhaps the exportation of dogs does not come under the sections of the people with whom you discussed it; who knows?

Nicky

Nicky

If you’re attuned to something it’s quite possible it can affect your electrical goods in your household, but that’s a whole different subject so I won’t go there.

*I have always said that I don't know how Wirthless *

What we find concerning, is everybody tagged him Dr Wirthless,( well before our time- )only then to turn around and appoint him head of Handle with Care WSPA in Australia ..
We can’t move on until we fully understand what’s gone on in the past.

I want to know why RSPCA National and Animals Australia ignored many invitations of meetings with Islamic leaders working under our MOU for Animal Welfare to phase out live exports.

Well may you say look PALE its personality clash.

No it’s more than that- trust me. Hugh has never met with any of our lawyers or pale heads. Glenys either. Yet pale was rejected as members of both WSPA and AA.


You don’t just thumb your noses at half a dozen lawyers with abattoirs background trade etc that are not charging you if your serious about phasing out live to replace with chilled.


Both Hugh and Glenys have sat on the same boards for YEARS. In all those years little has been achieved.


. Time for a sweep with a new broom imo. Perhaps Mark P and Lyn, although they are at times a little naïve as well. Someone like Col would be good. (Seriously uninvolved and not naïve.)

These are the same two that ignored invitations by us to attend meetings with Islamic contacts - yet sought meetings in our absence we were informed.

Ask yourself what it was they didn’t want to discuss in front of lawyers perhaps.’


*Perhaps the exportation of dogs ..*

Anne was the Ministers advisor. Sent straight from AQIS. Of course she would know.

Question IS did she lie?- *and what of her statement that Dr Wirthless together with UK RSPCA President had met with the then Minister of Ag two days prior and pledged their ongoing support for live exports.

PALE, we have been down this road SO OFTEN. The only way you are going to get the answers to your questions - and it will not happen in these forums - is to ASK THE PEOPLE THEMSELVES. I don't know the answers, nor, I suggest, does anyone else here. And what would be the possible benefit of having someone "uninvolved" leading animal welfare (no disrespect to you, Col!)?

Nor, I believe, are Mark Pearson or Lyn White "naive". They are experienced and successful campaigners who have led, or been instrumental in extraordinary achievements. You shouldn't try to diminish that (or them).

As for Hugh Wirth - again, you will only get your answers from those concerned, as is the case with PALE's rejection by WSPA and AA. Move on!

Nicky

*And what would be the possible benefit of having someone "uninvolved" leading animal welfare (no disrespect to you, Col!)?*

Nicky

Do not be so blind.

Mark and Lyn (as you know) are two of my personal chosen replacements for the others.

However looking at the big scale Mark IS naive imop as well as Lyn at times.

I 'DO' know haven spoken to both several times and being stunned to
discover neither were aware of AWB. (Thats just one example.)

The meat industry is very corrupt ( not to mention Governments) and without people with first hand knowledge your working with one hind tied behind your back.

(Now thats not having a go at them either.)

60 Minutes were also unaware . Mind you I would have thought Glenyse having worked with Andrew for years etc prior would have known.

Re Lyn Being an x cop doesnt suddendly give you a deep understanding of the reach of connections in a very corrupt world.

*As for Hugh Wirth - again,* ...


Wong again in this case . I post here comments in order to encourage people like yourself to think for themselves.

You have always denied contact with PETA AA etc but you get mighty upset if anybody points out any problems.

Well let me tell you there are problems- big ones.

As for WSPA membership I remind you the application was to have a rejection in writing from BOTH for the future record.

Regecting a new group with five or six lawyers on board with knowledge in the meat trade is mighty interesting.

After all what was their crime Nicky? That they worked for fREE to help Animals?? Think about it.


Or was it the fact the lawyers had the nouce to approach the Muslim Leaders to form a MOU to phaze out live and replace it with chilled?








Having someone like Col involved is vital Nicky.

Simple as that.

PALE, I'm sorry to have to say this, but I think it is you who is extraordinarily naive.

Your ONLY instrument of dealing with this issue is your self-proclaimed MoU with Muslim leaders, which appears to have gone nowhere, since you have since (bitterly) dissociated yourself from those same Muslim leaders (as stated on other threads).

I should remind you that Animals Australia has both Dr Malcolm Caulfield and barrister Graeme McEwen to name just two "on board", so it probably doesn't need the (again self professed) expertise of any others. And police officers deal with corruption every day, and naive is the last description I would apply to Mark Pearson. He is more media savvy and better informed than PALE could ever hope to be.

Just because, and if, as you claim, they were unaware of the AWB matter (something you happened to fluke on, and an issue in which the public interest was only surpassed by the degree of public apathy) means nothing. That meant nothing and led to nothing. Consider their other achievements and please stop trying to discredit everyone and anyone.

MOVE ON, for heavens sake, that was all years ago. If both groups chose to reject PALE they would have given reasons - and you would know what those were. Reading between the lines I suspect it had more to do with PALE's belligerent attitudes than anything else. And why does PALE even need to be associated with any other organisation anyway? PALE could certainly learn a great deal from the communication skills of those organisations for a start

As I have said so often before - do your thing and let the others do theirs - essentially - get over it. You will not change the landscape of animal welfare in this country by whinging on these forums about everyone else.

For what it's worth, the ship prevented from loading a couple of months ago because it failed AMSA's pollution regulations was the 25+ year old "Al Messilah"; I found the FCA judgment about it.

Nicky

Nicky
I am getting tired of explaining to you (or at least trying to) what issues must be dealt with before real improvements for Animals will happen.
We moved on ‘long’ ago. We are as well on excellent terms with Muslim leaders.

We joined them in a rejection of certain people sitting on head boards.

(Elections in February.)


Speaking of which you dismiss the importance of the MOU but let’s face it that’s what is required in order to phase out

I don’t fluke on things either investigations are my field.

You say not disclosing the AWB connection at the time of the AWB Enquiry is nothing. My God is you serious. That was the best opportunity to blow the live export issue right out of the water to the public. It was criminal not to have done so imop.
Or something else. Naïve at best or political C. Take your pick. Personally I think just naïve but who knows really. Andrew Bartlett replied he could get the media to report on it. Umm, I guess that is possible considering the media control and influence in this country and the protection given to the live animal trade.

The bottom line is as I said Animal Welfare requires people like Col involved somewhere along the way if for no other reason than his background understanding of the boys club.

Animal is a political joke in this country and elsewhere lets me wspa in your ear,.

I Can’t be bothered trying to explain it to you anymore. There is none so blind they can not see.
Best wishes for New Year anyway Nicky

Cheers

PALE, the AWB issue is ONLY an issue if the Australian public, and/or the media decide it is - and it, and they, didn't. What was being exported was not the concern, what was being done with it was. It was a fizzer. As I understand it PALE tried and failed to get media attention, so what makes you think anyone else could? You cannot force the media to report what you want reported. Get over it. It went nowhere.

I would be very surprised also if PALE would have any influence over AFIC elections.

You have been saying that this MoU is "what is needed". If that is the case and you have had one for something like five(?) years, what has it achieved? Bugger all, it seems. Try a new strategy because that's another thing that has gone nowhere.

There are also, from what I have seen, plenty of people involved in this issue who can mix it with the best of "old boys' clubs" - and they have the experience and knowledge to do so.

And please get over the "wspa in your ear" pun as well - it is so tired it is at death's door.

I hope that 2009 brings PALE into a new era that is less confrontational and uncompromising. There might then be some progress.

Nicky

Nicky

I thought I would give you the benefit of the dought that your not on olo to beat the drum of the veggies- but alas its clear you are.

I didnt say we would had influence over 'votes . I said we stood up with others which was appreciated and may I say not for the first time either. It probably wont be the last.

The same people supported us when others tried to gate crash our efforts without our presence.

I wouldlnt put in house Animal Welfare lawyers up against ours if I were you.

Pale have achieved a great deal in the last five years which is why everybody was scambling to try to take credit for our efforts especially with our work with Muslim Leaders of Australia- but others things also.


As I see it the warnings we were issued well before we opended pale were well and truely warranted. The ugly jealous unfriendly face of the veggie groups has raised its head again.

Re AWB and media your 'wrong' again- We did get the media looking at the connection and it was published.

It took them 6 weeks to investigate all our claims before it could go to print.

That proves that others could have got it out to media had they of known and if they were willing- including Andrew.

Sadly we waited far too long for a response from the others regarding AWB

We thought it was in the best interests of the animals for AA Mark etc to all come out together re the AWB.

Problem was they said they had no knowledge or idea of AWB being Live Exporters.

Thats pretty worrying though the eyes of others.

A bit slack at best and sus at worste.

PALE, perhaps you could provide a link - preferably more than one - to the published media (other than material written by PALE on various blogs trying to get anyone to take an interest). The reality is that NO-ONE was interested in saw this cross-corruption issue, it was aeons ago, and it is OVER. Get over it. Trying to accuse the media of corruption for not publishing your (apparently unproven) allegations doesn't really cut it - after all, all you know, it seems, is that Wesfarmers was sold. I vaguely recall someone commenting on another thread that the timeframe of that made it irrelevant anyway. It's basically a vague, unfounded claim without proper substantiation.

Quite frankly, knowing enough about the law and many lawyers, I'd be happy to back the lawyers I mentioned, and others I know, any day over those claimed by PALE, who seem to be notable for their absence of any comment or contribution to anything very much. Graeme McEwen, for example, is not an "in-house lawyer" for anyone; he is the Chair of the Victorian Animal Welfare (Barristers) Panel. Another you may want to look at is John Mancy, as well as those in WA who managed the "Al Kuwait" case.

One does not have to be "beating the veggie drum" simply because they disagree with PALE's strident, and poorly expressed opinions. These are the sorts of reasons why no-one wants to be associated with you. How many times do you need this pointed out?

You have yet to provide any evidence of PALE ever writing (rational and relevant - I've read the ones to the Democrats Animal Welfare Bill) submissions on anything, and what contribution, in reality, PALE has made to genuine animal welfare improvements here or anywhere else. That includes the to-date totally ineffectual MoU which also appears to have achieved nothing. It's clearly all just a lot of rhetoric with no substance. Just what do you do with your days? Then compare yourself with the likes of Mark Pearson and Lyn White, and ask yourself what you are REALLY in this for.

Nicky

Nicky

I have put the copy of the story run in the Gold Coast Bulletin up 'several' times.


I have no intention of going that far back at 4am.

The story runs over three posts and isn’t a link but a copy!

*- after all, all you know, it seems, is that Wesfarmers was sold.*

Yes that correct Nicky it was rather quickly. (Three weeks in fact )

That was directly after we contacted the authorities regarding the fact they had not disclosed their interests into the live animal trade to share holders.

It was quickly then sold to AWB.

Lyn White was very helpful with that at the time as I recall. ( I personally contacted her.
After which I posted a copy of the sale from Wesfarmers to AWB to her and Mark Pearson.

I am absolutely curtain Mark would not be denying that.

I also sent it to Kevin Rudd.


I think any lawyers fighting for animals is good.

Nicky quite frankly by your comments over three years it’s clear to me you know ZILCH about the law.

Which was one reason Robert offered to speak to you in person ( Lawyer) However you refused and to this day hide behind a false ID on OLO./

As for the Subs to the Animal Welfare Nicky pls remember AFIC working in conjunction with pale RSPCA QLD put in a very substantial document asking ALL Animal welfare groups to co operate.

Hugh certainly didn’t nor RSPCA National nor Animals Australia.
These are simply facts. One has to wonder why not?

Only then to attempt to hold meetings without our lawyers or pale presence.
As for the media if you don’t know the control the Government has I cant assist you.

Re RSPCA wanting more control and I agreed with Col that first we need to know what they would do with that power.

Would it be then handed back to DPI or AQIS?

IMOP I think it would. There is no way they could police it themselves and I had already pointed out the structure of RSPCA National.

PALE, so your claims got a run in the Gold Coast Bulletin (with a circulation of how many, compared to say the Australian, the Sydney Morning Herald or the Age), what precisely did it achieve? For example, you have not been able to diminish live exports out of your own state (Queensland), where the live export trade is expanding, not contracting.

As far as your "lawyer" is concerned, I have made it very clear that I want no contact with your organisation and why, and my reasons are echoed throughout these threads by people who HAVE made the mistake of contacting you and regretting it. Nor do I need any instruction on the law from anyone associated with PALE.

As for PALE's, and AFIC's submissions to the Animal Welfare Bill, you have been why they were totally irrelevant. In order to be considered, submissions have to address the content of the Bill,the Explanatory Memoranda and the First and Second Reading speeches (did you even read them?) - those did none of that. You simply used it as an publicity opportunity to push your own agenda, totally outside the provisions of the Bill. They most likely would have been disregarded completely for their absolute irrelevance (albeit many others were equally remiss, particularly the one page numbers from the vivisectionist lobby).

Your lawyers, if they exist, should be able to tell you that this is the legislative process. It was not the forum for you or anyone else to be telling other groups and individuals to fall into PALE's agenda, partly because the live export trade was not contained in the Bill and also because it was highly inappropriate.

I have no idea whether RSPCA National or Animals Australia registered submissions and if not why not. What I DO question is why PALE could not be bothered submitting anything to the recent national animal welfare strategy. You cannot possibly keep claiming credibility forever over a couple of irrelevant, poorly prepared, five year old submissions to a Bill that was never going to go anywhere because the Howard government stacked the Committee.

Nicky

Pale & Nicky:

I wish to bring a couple or three issues to your attention!

1) After running a check, I can find no evidence that Wesfarmers has sold out to the AWB!

2) If PALE could spend a little more time on English composition, spelling amd punctuation, I think their comments would appear more acceptable and relevant to the issues presented! ( I am NOT being derogatory in this observation, but simply attempting to present the body in a more acceptable light!)

3) Nobody has made the slightest comment about the recent "horrendous" mutilations occuring in Queensland involving:
a) The abhorrent and callous removal of a puppies ears, resulting in the eventual death of the animal!
b) The breaking into an Emu`s enclosure and the subsequent stabbing to death of the wretched bird!

It appears that both of these outrageous acts were carried out by recent " New Queenslanders " although publicity of place of origin of the "offenders" seems for some reason ( which I suspect to be political) to be generally avoided!

I have noted that many acts of violence and cruelty have increased commensurate with the influx of a large percentage of low socio-economic newcomers to the State!

I hope our ex State Premier Peter Beattie is proud of his achievement
in relegating this once glorious State to "just another Rat`s Nest" of crime, violence and increasing poverty!

Nicky
FYI The Gold Coast Bulletin was at that time the largest Regional newspaper in Australia.
It is now the second largest being taken over by Newcastle Herald.

PALE set out from the start only to establish a working arrangement between farmers and Muslim leaders to hand over to RSPCA National then Animals Australia.

It was only when it was made clear RSPCA National and Animals Australia were no interested in working with farmers to reopen abattoirs we continued ourselves.

We are simply a small group of people with a deep concern for animals. Some are lawyers some cleaners a few federal police officers and ALL of my personal friends and staff. Also several members overseas. Many of who are Muslims and THEY work harder than most!

Interesting that seems to bother not only you but your friends .

We would have thought the more people working to help animals the better. You HAVE seen some of our lawyers on our web site Nicky so what are you talking about.

We are well used to these tactics and abusive even threatening phone calls from some of the looneys calling us animal killers etc.

Its common among extremists. We assisted ladies in Japan who were receiving the same treatment because they opened their own little groups to help stay dogs and cats.

As far as our working arrangements with AFIC are concerned that is between myself AFIC and our lawyers.

Twenty years is far too! Long for the same people to sit on any board anywhere and THAT’S perhaps why nothings even happened to really HELP our Animals! IOOO

You are SO ill informed Nicky. The only thing that WILL change it is being involved with the industry and reopening more abattoirs HERE.

BUT your friends say on their web page that’s what they want – while writing to us something TOTALLY different.

Had we wanted to cause trouble we WOULD have given THOSE letters to The Sydney Morning Herald

Cuphandle, thank you. I cannot find anything substantial to suggest that Wesfarmers was in fact sold to AWB or that any particular live export shipments were involved either; only PALE's claims to that effect (maybe that's why no-one was interested in taking the issue up - it could not be proven beyond any doubt, and they would have been risking litigation).

PALE also cannot seem to understand that amongst the elements of credibility of any organisation is its ability to communicate, with proper attention to grammar, syntax, spelling and punctuation.

Everything PALE has ever done seems to be at least five years ago - the last time I looked at its website, nothing had changed in that time (I tend to avoid it because of the music!).

I think I saw someone who purported to be a lawyer, who, looking at Andrew Bartlett's blogs, seems to come out of the woodwork from time to time to issue vague and unsubstantiated (by law) threats of legal action when PALE's more outrageous efforts are challenged - again, a long time ago.

Beyond the submissions to the animal welfare bill aeons ago, which I have discussed above, nothing appears to have happened - in contrast to the efforts of Mark Pearson and others of Animal Liberation and Animals Australia generally.

Cuphandle is quite right in stating that Queensland seems to be the leader in the most vicious cruelty cases - what is PALE doing to address that? And what is it doing to stop the expansion of live exports from Queensland?

Quite frankly, nothing PALE does "bothers" me - I doubt if it bothers anyone else either, and I doubt even more that there is any substance in the allegations of abusive phone calls and the like.

But do enlighten us. How many members does PALE have in total, and what is the actual circulation of the Gold Coast Bulletin? And do you even KNOW who is on the Animals Australia Executive? I don't.

Nicky

Cuphandle,

Gday
Thats howdy in real langage. Would you mind explaining to us why this is your first comment and yet you claim you cant follow.?
Then Nickys timely agreement with herself.


See these are the silly games I have no time for. Then Nickys timely agreement with herself.

Its new years Eve and I am off to the beach to join friends so I wont delay my response.
The fact that you are STILL ignorant about Wesfarmers Sale of their Live Animal Interests to AWB SHOWS us why we need people like pale.

It also raises an even more serious point that DESPITE the documents being sent to Animals Australia Rudd Mark Pearson etc nobody has made this known to their followers.

So now the question we must ask to WHY NOT?

Then you wonder why I said we need more people like Col.

To the best of my recollection it was the 20th of October 2003. I do know it was only three weeks after we contacted some people that Lyn White suggested to enquire if Wes farmers had disclosed their interests in the cruel live animal trade- (Which they had not) they were given very short notice to do so.

That was the time of the Como as well so as you can appreciate they were in a hurry to dump the image.

I spoke personally with heads of Wes farmers at the time who were desperate for us not to disclose their interests.

(In fact it was the head person who sent me the copy of the sale.
I then sent that on to Andrew Rudd Mark Pearson and Animals Australia.

Its already up on OLO but I will repost it.( When I get time)
Or perhaps you could ask AA or Andrew B for a copy.

Why not try Rudd he recieved one as well.

Nicky

Just quickly as I am on my way out- Whatever the coverage of the largest regional paper at the time regarding AWBs involvment in live exports after their purchase from Wesfarmers it was a hell of a lot more than was put out by any other organisation!

As far as QLD RSPCA goes they do a fantasic job with what they have. Only today they charged again an offender and took control of another 60 animals.
QLD is very difficult given the fact every man and his dog are moving up here.'
I really wish we could close the borders tbo.

The sad fact of life is that cruelty is on the increase- not the decline all over Australia and the world. Courts are not handing down tough enough sentences.
RSPCA CEO has been a leader in Animal welfare in Australia kicking off many new programes and training abaoriginal inspectors.

However neither he nor staff are Robbinson Cruso.
We do not work with RSPCA QLD on domestic jobs either- Only Live Exports.
Although of course we wish them well and support them totally.

What is needed is a federal case to challange the federal Government and MAKE them introduce a bill- PLUSS millions of dollars put into policing it.
Preferably in the hands of people like Lyn White and Mark Pearson.
What we dont need is the same people sitting on boards for twenty years- regardless of WHAT industrty.

Think about it.

PALE, Cuphandle does not need to explain himself to you or anyone else; he is free to comment and express his opinions when he chooses.

If it is true that Wesfarmers sold to AWB and exported animals, and you can directly link profits to the Saddam Hussein Iraqi regime, please do so. Otherwise you have demonstrated absolutely nothing substantial or really worth reporting on, and it is nothing more than hearsay (your "lawyers" will explain that concept to you).

As for "Nicky agreeing with herself", what have you been drinking or smoking?

I did not ask what RSPCA Queensland had been doing (they are actually reported in the media as doing something), I asked what PALE had been doing - bugger all, it seems. You claim to work with RSPCA Queensland on live exports - apparently not very successfully, since the trade from Queensland is expanding.

I also asked if you even knew who was in fact on Animals Australia's Executive; it seems you cannot tell us that either. Your complaint against Animals Australia is against one person, yet you want to malign a number of highly competent and accomplished people for no better reason than you couldn't get your own way. What you really want is to take over yourself and claim any "glory" to be had - trust me, it won't happen.

If you were even remotely genuine and credible, you would not be trying to discredit Handle with Care's initiatives for no better reason than they chose not to include PALE. You should be supporting it, not denigrating it; after all, they have certainly done it better than you have managed to do in - what? - eight years. You claim to want to stop the live export trade, but it's only to be on YOUR terms, with YOU claiming sole credit. You are so OBVIOUS about it.

As I said - MOVE ON. Try to make 2009 a year of achieving something. Meanwhile, enjoy the beach. I thought the only friends you had were in your imagination. And again, HOW many members does PALE have?

Nicky

PALE, if your "lawyers" are so "up there", why have they not explained the legislative process to you, and why have they not taken on a federal case? The "Al Kuwait" appeal was going begging, if you could have established standing to run it. But where were you? Wanting others to do it, just like when they called for submissions to the National Animal Welfare Strategy.

As for your live export work, there was a news item only today about the growth of the live cattle trade from Queensland - cattle from properties handed over to Aboriginal people. Doesn't look like you've had much success there either.

Empty rhetoric. I rest my case.

Nicky

Cuphandle,

First comment - yet you claim to have such interest + you just ‘happened’ to support Nicky

The fact you’re ignorant about Wes farmers Sale of their Live Animal Interests to AWB shows us ‘why’ we need people like pale.

I*t also raises an even more disturbing point*

Despite the documents being sent to Animals Australia, Mark Pearson, Andrew Bartlett nobody has made this information public other than us according to you .

*So now the question we must ask to why not.??*

I would have thought it might have been helpful (speaking of web sites) to have a list of people involved in the barbaric trade.

Something like this list that we supplied sent to Lyn at Animals Australia and she was very appreciate of-. Lyn white and Mark Pearson are ‘so ‘refreshing and down to earth with the RIGHT attitude.

http://www.livexports.com/contacts.html

Re Wes- farmers

To the best of my recollection it was around 20th of October 2003.

It was three weeks after we contacted some people that Lyn suggested to enquire if Wes farmers had disclosed their interests in the cruel live animal trade- (Which they had not) they were given very short notice to do so.

That was the time of the Como as well so as you can appreciate they were in a hurry to dump the image.

I spoke personally with heads of Wes farmers at the time who were desperate for us not to disclose their interests. (In fact it was the head person who sent me the copy of the sale.

I then sent that on to Andrew Bartlett Mark Pearson and Animals Australia.

I have posted it on OLO several times already.
Tell you what though why don’t you write to Kevin Rudd and ask him for a copy. He especially requested it at the time he was Shadow Minister. Labour were desperately looking for something on Downer and Howard Vaile.

Gee wiz and after all that Mr Rudd you didn’t use it.

One can only ponder as to why not.

How`s the parties donations going by the way Mr Rudd.?

Nicky:

I was astounded to read PALE`s response to my comments, which in their case was help them become a trifle more literate,....however it appears that PALE` are blinded by their own rambling diatribe and simply refuse to accept any constructive criticism offered in good faith!

I also noted that the issues that I mentioned re the severing of the puppies ears and consequent death, as well as the butchered Emu in Bundaberg, did not rate even a simple response!

If PALE is so genuinely concerned about animal welfare issues, why do they continue rabbitting on about insignificant and spurious facts and figures that really do very little except cloud the whole issue, and judging by their very consistent responses on this forum, appear to be conducting some form of witch-hunt against certain individuals like yourself?.....They certainly do appear to have a very blunt axe to grind!

Cuphandle, that would be as much of a mystery to other contributors to these threads as it is to you and me. You will have noted that other threads to which PALE contributes descend very rapidly into little more than attacks upon everyone involved in the animal welfare movement, with Animals Australia and RSPCA National bearing the brunt of it. All this stuff happened YEARS AND YEARS ago, as did this vague allegation about AWB and Wesfarmers which really points to nothing other than a business transaction.

There is no evidence provided to suggest that any profiteering from the export of live animals in fact went to the Iraqi regime. In its blind pursuit of all this total irrelevance, PALE misses opportunities to do the things it claims to be doing - "caring for animals". How many people have left all these threads as soon as PALE enters them? Belly is a case in point; he seems to suffer more attacks than anyone.

As far as I can tell, PALE might have had a chance at some credibility many years ago, but has done nothing since, if you look at its website, which is all very old material. But what you say, and it was in good faith, is absolutely right. No-one takes an organisation with such poor communication skills seriously, it indicates that its business practices overall would be no better.

There have been many, many opportunities and strategies available had PALE chosen to do anything with them, but instead, it prefers to spend its time engaging in vicious little vendettas against anyone who questions it. In Queensland in particular, there have been some shocking instances of vicious cruelty, but PALE remains silent on those. I also still await PALE's answer to my questions about how many members it has, and who is on the Executive of Animals Australia.

PALE's means of dealing with challenge is to immediately attack, rather than doing anything remotely constructive. Like all the other threads which PALE has corrupted, this one has just about come to a dead end.

Cuphandle, Happy New Year!
Nicky

Cup handle,
We do not have involvement in domestic Animal Cruelty cases.

Our work is live exports.

Re the severing of the puppy’s ears and consequent death, as well as the butchered Emus in Bundaberg, we did only what other did .

We contacted the station and offered to raise the rewards to anybody with information that might lead to a conviction.

RSPCA QLD are looking after the case of the puppies ears togther with police.

They are without a doubt the leaders in Animal Welfare imo in this country.
With the flood of people relocating to QLD they perform miracles against all odds.

Its probably just as well we will never meet the low lifes that chopped the puppies ears.


I am sick to death of the courts going easy on these mongrels who claim they are mentally effected by drugs.

I guess we have the do gooders to thanks for that again!
Pity the same do gooders didnt take the time to help stop cruelty to Animals!

This comment is transferred from the fatuous thread about Nicole Kidman and Hugh Jackman:-

PALE, Where did I say that I believe that AWB was profiteering from live exports and the Iraqi regime? YOU said that and I asked you to prove a factual, conclusive link about money directly channeled to that regime from live animal exports. You have failed to do so (again). You have found a business transaction, nothing more, nothing less.

Nor did I say that I worked full time in animal welfare (someone has to work and pay taxes in this country, you know, to fund all those people on pensions). Nor have you told us how many members PALE has "working 24/7 without pay". And who is on Animals Australia's Executive?

Not involving itself in "domestic" matters would seem to be a bit of a strategic blunder, since PALE has not been able to even make a dent in live exports, particularly the expansion in its home state. Perhaps its "24/7" work "without payment" would be better spent supporting RSPCA Queensland's local efforts rather than discrediting everyone and everything else involved in animal advocacy in the country. Cuphandle is absolutely right; no-one is interested in the old news and old vendettas, yet they re-surface on every thread as - yes, a witch hunt - against people like Glenys Ooogjes (who CAN put together coherent documents). As for me, Cuphandle, I go through this on every thread that PALE infiltrates. I have broad shoulders.

What the courts fail to recognise is that drug use is a lifestyle choice not a mental illness. And what society fails to realise is that alcohol is a drug (and it may cause people to become hopelessly incoherent writing posts on forum threads, which I reckon is how the Kidman/Jackman thread came about).

Nicky

Nicky
The fact is AWB were not just selling wheat- It was money from live exports as well. -Still is.

So you mean to tell me you think its ok to have a peak group in Australia- according to you not know these facts?

Crickey no wonder why we still have live exports

When you are lobbying it’s extremely slack to have missed something as major as that.

The journalist who covered the story (as I said )ended up spending six weeks checking out all the facts he was given.

After all AWB Enquiry was the biggest ever held in Australia?

Same regarding Nicole and our tourism dollar.
Pls note the vast funds now pumping into Bowen for the shipping ports.
Dominique has left her position and I couldn’t care less that’s taken over TBO.
You’re the one obsessed with AA. I didn’t mind the lady myself.

You girls seem to all have the same extreme personalities and that’s a great pity for animals.

RSPCA waltz and all have mostly fantastic people with great personalities which what makes them the leaders by miles. Which brings me back to this thread title. RSPCA National should first inform us if they would hand over the poweres the want to AQIS or dPI before we go any further.



The fact you choose to go to work to keep your partner is your ‘own ‘business.
Everybody is different but it wouldn’t suite me TBO.

I am very happy to pay to help aged pensioners who gave Australia its start. I have worked hard all my life and own an investigation company which enables me to spent full time working to support RSPCA QLD.

We also have other interests. (Not that it’s your business)

"RSPCA waltz"? Good heavens, I thought they would be too busy for that.

We have an expanding live export trade out of Queensland partly because no-one there is doing anything about it. BTW, what happened to the "And Intensive Farming" tag? That has gone nowhere either.

Still I see no direct evidence of AWB directly channeling money from live export shipments to the Iraqi regime (BTW, that regime fell over some time ago, so it's unlikely that they "still are"), just more wasted space about a piddling business transaction. If your regional Gold Coast journo took six weeks to investigate that, he mustn't be a particularly effective researcher.

As for the Kidman claptrap, I am convinced you were on something when you did that. It was arguably one of your greatest credibility failures to date. I also still see nothing about the number of members PALE has. If I were considering joining any group that would be one of my first questions - so why can you not answer it?

And of course you would not be telling us about your "achievements" with Muslim leaders, because they were so long ago.

What makes you think I "keep" a partner? I work because I have a strong career ethic, to support my animals, my animal advocacy activities, and those countless people, some of whom should, and some of whom should not be, on pensions. But we won't go there.

I don't need to know who is on the Executive of Animals Australia. I do, however, know that not all of them would have been there for 20-odd years, and further, those people are elected representatives. That, even to you, should speak for itself.

Nicky

Nicky
Quite frankly my dear we do not give a dam as to what you think as you are not even on the map of animal welfare.

We prefer to work with RSPCA QLD Farmers and Muslim people because THATS where a difference can be made.

Our efforts are ENTILEY from our own hearts and pockets in conjunction with RSPCA QLD. We do NOT report EVERYTHING we are doing to people such as yourself.

You are asking for privy confidential information regarding not only our organisation but RSPCA QLD and Muslim Leaders of Australia.



. You just get on and do whatever it is you 'think you do to help animals.
From what we can see thats nothing other than be paranoid about the fact our organisation WONT conform to extremists. All you do is get the farmers and public off side.

I was requested by 'everyone we work with to ignore your rants and to be honest YOU especially.

I was not willing to do that at the time because I wished to give you credit for at least showing an interest in animals.

I was however wrong in my judgment of you. You clearly DONT want to know about important issues- So consider it now done.

PALE&IF:

I refer to your comment directed at myself on Wed 31 DEC at 11.03.22pm
which was as follows:
"Cuphandle,
G,day
Thats howdy in real language.Would you mind explaining to
us why this is your first comment and yet you claim you
cant follow?

Then Nickys timely argument with herself."

I would strongly suggest that you learn to read, write, spell and count as that was NOT my first comment on this Thread,.....if you had bothered to look, you may have noticed that I made comments on Mon 01DEC (Comment 5), Tue 02DEC (Comment 18), Mon 08DEC (Comment 46) and again on Wed 31DEC (Comment 96?)

Using your methodology in replying, I would advise you that I do NOT respond to "howdy", it is NOT "real language" ( and you will note that I have inserted the missing letter "u" in your spelling, although I have left your original quotation, as above, uncorrected!).... "Howdy" is "Americo" in "new-speak" and I refuse to converse in "foreign euphemisms"!

I do NOT have to explain anything to you ( until you start paying my wages!) Your arrogance has once again illustrated to all concerned that your feeble ongoing efforts to hijack this Thread have once again failed and your consistent attempted character assassination of your fellow participants does not go far in making friends or recruiting supporters for your cause!

If this is all we can look forward to,...may I suggest that you seek some sort of help with your English composition and punctuation skills(?), before showering us with your anally retentive gibberish!

Happy New Year to you!

A special Happy New Year to Nicky!

Dear Cuphandle, thank you for that, it is much appreciated. I hope 2009 is a happy year for you too. I have absolutely no idea where the "howdy" and "G'day" came from either. I'm also and equally mystified about my "timely argument with (myself)".

Sadly, I think any well-meaning advice from any of us falls on deaf ears with PALE. What is especially sad about that is that members of the community, and these fora, may see all animal advocates as abusive, aggressive, incoherent rabble, and I can assure everyone that that is far from the truth - it is only PALE which behaves so appallingly.

Other animal advocacy organisations are able to support their claims with evidence of real achievement, and are able to conduct rational, informed debate. They do not make high-flying, but false and unsubstantiated claims of dubious achievements, which may at one time have had some merit, but were a long time ago.

PALE's sole purpose for being really seems to be nothing more than a vendetta against the real (and often quiet) achievers in animal welfare, and its only mechanism for doing so appears to be hijacking these threads for the purpose of empty self-aggrandizement to the discredit of others. We have the same tired old arguments every time PALE enters any thread started with the very best of intentions.

Here's to a better 2009!

Nicky

Cup handle,
Gee and we were thinking you were really into the yanks.
PETA is your bible is it not. No wonder why you lot are hated by the farmers.
Many self made millionaires don’t read or write.Put most of you out on a farm and you wouldn’t know what to do.
It should be compulsory to do some time learning to be a jillaroo before allowing these so called animal welfare groups to formulate.
You are the people who make it so hard to deal with the industry.

'Both sides' of Federal Government have commented that at least pale DO have an alternative.

Governments are only there to regulate industry.

The Industry must be driven by the suppliers and farmers but we all know how much support the farmers have been given and you DARE to put the blame back at their! feet.
Where were YOU people when they de -regulated milk ...

The real problem with Animal Welfare as we see it is apart from RSPCA it’s full of veggie snobs convinced they walk on a higher moral ground.

We take a great deal of advice from an old Abattoir owner working.
He was the one of the first to export meat to the Middle East after seeing first hand the treatment of animals in the 1930s.
He doesn’t read or write and is a walking book on the meat trade and live exports.
This man took it upon himself along with a few mates to personally address the Prime Minister in NZ years ago and ‘correctly predicated Australians future.

Once again the only Animal Welfare leader who took the time to meet with this man was CEO RSPCA QLD Mr Mark Townend.

Oh and another thing. The Australian Newspaper have told us they would have happily report much more on Animal Welfare IF only it were from other than always Animal Australia.

Think about it and involve the general public more.
For the Animals.

I have not seen Cuphandle favouring any Americanisms (or even Australian slang, for that matter) on these fora, PALE - in fact, I seem to recall you once accusing him of being a young female activist from Queensland and his replying that he is in fact a retired farmer.

Do try to get your ducks in a row before making fatuous and irrelevant accusations simply because he has quite rightly criticised your shocking communication (I am still curious about the waltzing at the RSPCA, I must admit). You should also acknowledge your quotes from other people; it was in fact Hugh Wirth who used the "higher moral ground" phrase, yet you have claimed it as an original. In academic circles that is plagiarism.

Do you mean "predict" Australia's future, not "predicate"? Otherwise that is yet another sentence that doesn't make sense.

I noticed a couple of weeks ago a comment from Live Export Shame in the Australian, but I have never seen any reference to PALE in its articles. Perhaps you could provide some links to back up your story. Or are you just going to continue to refuse to answer my questions, and call out your legions whom you claim have advised you not to debate with me any further, pack up your little bat and ball and run off home?

Nicky

Nicky:

As you can see by the response from PALE&IF to my last comment, ....this is what makes them so unique ( to loosely coin a phrase!)in this modern world. They simply ignore the merits of any criticism and continue to stumble blindly onwards and downwards in their own little campaign of denigration!...."The Emperor Really DOES WEAR NO clothes!"

You would have noticed the total lack of acknowledgement or apology for their blatant erroneus statements regarding my contributions to this Thread, or any comment with regard to their English comprehension!

It is strange to find that you Nicky can remember the fact that I did state on other threads that I am in fact a retired farmer and over the years have probably had more to do with the animal kingdom than PALE and it`s minions,....however that is another journey for another time!

I must apologize to all readers that in the process of typing the quotation from PALE&IF in my previous comment,....I inadvertently corrected some of their spelling,...probably through force of habit!

Hello Cuphandle
I remembered because you made some expert comment about an aspect of animal welfare at that time, and also, at that time as well, because PALE was accusing everyone who challenged them of being all sorts of people with whom I can only imagine PALE has had some sort of disagreement in the past. PALE never admits mistakes or errors in any form, as you know.

It is a shame, because by its behaviour, PALE discredits everyone who has an interest in animal welfare, and seeks to make us all look like incompetent, uneducated idiots. I think you got an oblique response to your comments about the abuse of the English language in the form of PALE knowing people who think that is something to be proud of. On the other hand, PALE tries to claim to have some business credibility; with communication skills like this, it is unlikely in the extreme.

Persisting down the path of trying to diminish everyone else who HAS made great contributions to animal welfare in the form of the vendettas that appear, in the same tired form, on every thread that PALE corrupts, does it no credit. As for the AWB fiasco, I recall someone pointing out that the timeframe PALE keeps throwing up pointed to it being impossible for the Iraqi regime being able to profit from the export of live animals. As I said - it was nothing more than a business transaction, and PALE provides no evidence to the contrary.

I suspect we are at a point that PALE will now bring out the legions of "members, lawyers, and Muslim Leaders" from its imagination where they live who advised them not to communicate with me, and discontinue debate. Anything rather than answer the hard questions.

I hope you're having a lovely new year. I also seem to remember you still have some lovely animals, am I right?

Cheers
Nicky

THE Gold Coast BULLETIN, Tuesday, March 7, 2006 - Page 17

Live export trade inquiry would be like lambs to slaughter

THE RSPCA may have the answer for federal Labor politicians struggling to galvanise voters with the AWB bribery scandal.
The recent 60 Minutes program on Channel 9 revealing cruelty on Australian cattle in the Middle East hit a nerve.
Not that the RSPCA was surprised by the strong response from Australians outraged at endemic cruelty in the live export trade.
Many Australian voters may not give two hoots about $300 million in kickbacks to Saddam Hussein to sew up Australian wheat sales to Iraq. But it would be a different story if the AWB was ever linked to live exports.
The Gold Coast-based Halal Kind Meats is off to the backblocks of Queensland and Western Australia to look for Australian slaughtering opportunities. Dozens of Australian abattoirs have closed since the live export trade boomed in the 1990s. Kindness to animals is part of the Australian 'fair go' tradition.
The temporary ban on the export of live cattle to Egypt over the 60 Minutes expose looks like a token gesture from a government committed to livestock exports.
Labor appears more concerned with the future of Australia's livestock trade overseas than banning the practice. Even noted animal
lover, HM The Queen, passed the buck back to Australia when asked to intervene.
To be Contiuned

THE Gold Coast BULLETIN, Tuesday, March 7, 2006 - Page 17 ( Copy) contiuned

Cattle rate No. 2 on live export numbers. Sheep are export kings. Those imperfect or injured ones not fed to the sharks or minced alive await their fate at Middle Eastern slaughterhouses. Travel from farm to abattoir can take three months.
Animal welfare zealots reckon Australia's live export trade is 'a story of profit at any cost'. With six million sheep, 850 cattle and 100,000 goats shipped offshore each year there must be a juicy quid in the game for someone.

Why doesn't Labor home in on a Wesl Australian live export investigation which found the trade costs Australia $1.7 billion in local production plus $280 million in household income and up to 12,000 jobs?
The Australian Federation of Islamic Councils insists live exports are not necessary to comply with Muslim laws.
"That can be done in Australia under the Australian Government supervised Muslim Slaughter Program," said AFIC president Dr Ameer Ali. More than two million sheep were slaughtered in Australia last year for Middle Eastern markets and shipped frozen or chilled.



THE Gold Coast BULLETIN, Tuesday, March 7, 2006 - Page 17

One COULD Ask Not only Why Didnt Labour BUT Anybody ELSE??

That looks rather like something PALE sent to the Gold Coast Bulletin rather than what was actually printed. Far too much of the PALE vernacular, I'm afraid. No self-respecting journalist would write a piece like that, even in a regional newspaper.

"But it would be a different story if the AWB was ever linked to live exports".

So where is the link? This says absolutely nothing.

Is this the best you could come up with? And what did HKM achieve in its "trip to the backblocks"? Let's not forget this is all almost THREE YEARS AGO.

Furthermore "HM The Queen" and her family of misfits are anything but animal lovers. They wear fur, and hunt defenceless animals down with dogs and guns at every opportunity. For "fun".

Finally, when did Cuphandle ever indicate that he was a supporter of PETA (or anything American)? From what I can tell, he simply deplores cruelty to animals and does not subscribe to any particular animal welfare organisation.

Nicky

Nicky:

In my last comment I stated that I found it strange that you could remember me saying that I was a retired farmer!....I omitted to continue that "yet PALE could not even remember my three previous posts on this thread!"....although I think that you had picked up on that missing statement!

Yes!...I still have 5 Bulls, 4 Steers, 1 horse, 2 dogs, all with a backyard of around a thousand acres to play in!

You were also right in your assessment that Queensland is fast becoming the country`s most animal cruelty intensive state!....something to be really proud of!

It certainly appears that PALE & IF are more to be pitied than laughed at and are doing themselves more of an injustice by their recalcitrence and sheer bloody-mindedness!

I was not impressed with PALE`s statement that they thought that I was right into Yanks ( and I didn`t really know which way to take that statement?) ...however once again if they had any sense they would have picked up on the fact that I am not a particular lover of
Americans or their Administration!.....PALE`s minds do work in mysterious ways!

Cuphandle

Correct- You did make three comments. Sorry

I`m tired of the outright insanity with statements such as this.=
* No self-respecting journalist would write a piece like that, even in a regional newspaper.*

This defames the Gold Coast Bulletin 'itself' as well as the 'Editor 'and the most 'senior journalist'- not to mention pale as well as RSPCA QLD who were also very helpful in regards to that particular media release.

Surley it would have been in the interests of everybody to at least do a check by Googles or contacting the News Paper itself!

I know its not your doing but really if you 'blindly' 'support' people who make such statements we are probably not being unfair by saying- (if the cap fits.)

We have turned the other cheek on so many things that the same person has written on OLO

This time we intend to report this to GY and The Editor of The Gold Coast Bulletin. ( I dont think he will be very impressed.)

He will no doubt contact OLO to have a contact address provided to deal with the author.



Actually I am not fans of the US either given they are reasonsible and have DRIVEN the Live Export trade for years.

Your correct about QLD being the red neck for Live Cattle Exports.
Its just as WA are the capital for sheep.

We have raised this for ages to other animal welfare groups.



Of course there are many other ports in QLD where they ship live animals from.
As you know Bowen is about to be number one on the map with Live Exports given the vast amounts pumped into expanding the ports there.

No doubt Nicole`s Movie and her buying a catle ranch will be seen by some as the hip thing to do.

Cuphandle, how lucky you are! I wish I had more space so that I could have more animals. I'm very lucky with my two delightful dogs, and some hens from a battery farm though. The hens bully the dogs unmercifully. Happily, I'm in touch with lots of other farmed animals through friends who, like you, have animals living out their lives in peace.

Do you really think PALE is to be pitied? In a world of its own, I reckon. It was only a matter of time before the legal threats started appearing (sigh! Not again!). Still no answers to my questions, no evidence of anything, nor can the remark about Americans be construed as an apology to you. It's extraordinary to find that the Americans are "reasonsible" (sic) for Australia's live export trade, isn't it?

PALE also is apparently of the opinion that it is acceptable to accuse others of mental disorders (who mentioned people in glass houses?). Perhaps it's taken out insurance to defend libel cases. Given the number of people they have slandered in these threads. It's hard to believe that an insurance company would take on that sort of liability though. As for Graham (Young), he is under no illusions here, and I can't wait to hear from the Gold Coast Bulletin either.

"For eight years The gold Coast Bulletin have refused to do a story on Live Animal Exports".

Posted by People Against Live Exports & Intensive Farming, Thursday, 22 March 2007 9:11:21 AM

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=3752

"The Gold Coast Bulletin have refused to do a story on our group which is called People Against Live Exports for almost five years now".
http://andrewbartlett.com/?p=117 29/01/2006

So which is it, PALE?

It really is sad that PALE does not turn its attention to the escalating cruelty in its own state, where serious action is clearly needed. Arguing dead issues, reiterating ad nauseum old vendettas and making fatuous observations about Nicole Kidman really adds to the extraordinary ignorance expressed here - at an appalling standard - by PALE every day. Send PALE a dictionary, someone!

Nicky

Cuphandle

The Bulletin have 'always' maintained People Living on the Gold Coast were not interested in that happended in the bush.' Standard"

However as the AWB was the largest Royal Commission ever held in Australia Head journalists were interested that neither Rudd (Shadow Minister at the time) nor others with supposed interests in AnimalWelfare said one word.

That was too juicy a story for them to miss.

As Andrew Bartlett`s name has been raised you might like to confirm with him when we informed him about AWB. He requested we foward a copy of the sale from Wesfarmers like Rudd and Mark Pearson AA ..

Later when we chased him up about it he then reported back to us HE couldnt get the media to do a story on it.

The Bulletin does stories on most NFP organisations.

However Live Exports 'was ' excluded for years and years.

Had it not been for the scale of AWB story and CLEARLY having a Jig at Labour -I am quite sure they still wouldnt have done one.



Many other regional papers that belonged to Murdock who didnt do stories which involves live exports.

Packer and Murdock were involved in live exports on a large scale.
IMO a complete conflict of interest that was AFAIK never raised by any other group to the Minister for Cummication other than pale.

The truth is many regional papers as well were not prepaired to upset those who were advertsing. Clearly its their main scourse of bread and butter.

A WA Regional newspaper did do a full front page story that pale gave them years ago however thats not the usual.

Gold Coast Bulletin Senior staff most certainly DID do a a story on AWB.
They spent six weeks doing the research and checking the facts with their legal team before printing. (standard.)

Only someone with a problem imop would be stupid enough to dispute that as clearly its very easily checked

PALE, you apparently cannot provide a reliable link for the claimed Gold Coast Bulletin story (other than the MULTIPLE, MULTIPLE times you have cut and pasted your media release on these pages). In looking for the actual story, it is apparent that the transaction between Wesfarmers and AWB was very common knowledge and there is no evidence to suggest - anywhere - that any profiteering to the Iraqi regime from live animal exports occurred. That is without doubt the reason why no-one was interested. The information was already out there.

Perhaps you can provide a link for the claimed Western Australian story (I'd be interested to see a WA regional paper doing a story that "PALE gave them", however). If it is the story of the WA wheatbelt abattoir project, that did not originate with PALE.

And if the GCB DID do the story, why did you claim on other fora that it didn't? Why did you tell such lies? Against whom were you trying to score points at that time?

And who said the Cole enquiry was the "largest Royal Commission to be held in Australia"? Have you evidence of that? A quick search of Royal Commissions suggests otherwise. It was only more remarkable because of the politicians who were called to give evidence.

Meanwhile, here is something you may have overlooked:

Nomination for Young Australian of the Year - Western Australia

Annabelle Coppin - 24
Beef cattle producer
Growing up on an isolated cattle property in the Pilbara, Annabelle Coppin has risen to become a spokesperson and leading light in the live-export industry. She currently manages a 2300-hectare property, and recently became one of the youngest people in Australia ever to be awarded the prestigious Nuffield Scholarship. which she will use to study beef export trends by going to the Middle East, Indonesia and South America. Annabelle has shown great initiative and displayed a maturity and character well above her age. She is a dynamic advocate for her industry and is always working hard to improve the beef trade.

http://www.australianoftheyear.org.au/pages/page483.asp

Nicky

Cuphandle, would you not think that PALE would be better advised to put its efforts into some of these local matters rather than focusing on ancient vendettas, dead projects, and commonly known "news" items? Although it's clear that PALE knows nothing about legislative process, perhaps it should be assisting RSPCA Queensland in calling for proper enforcement of penalties contained in the Act.

1. Two dogs killed
North Rockhampton

Friday, Jan 2, 2009

A 23-year-old man has been charged with animal cruelty after an incident in North Rockhampton last night. Around 11.45pm it is alleged the man killed two dogs at a Potts Street address. The man has been charged with two counts of animal cruelty and one count of stealing. He is to face Rockhampton Magistrates Court on January 19.

http://livenews.com.au/Articles/2009/01/04/Man_charged_with_animal_cruelty_over_dogs_deaths

2. A Townsville magistrate has handed down his findings in a case described by the RSPCA as one of the worst cases of animal cruelty ever seen in Queensland.

In July this year, RSPCA inspectors seized 113 dogs, nearly 500 rats, more than 70 mice, a cat and several guinea pigs and birds from a far north Queensland property.

Several dead animals were also found in a freezer at the Calcium property.

Frederick Dart and Megan Ann Hajridin have pleaded guilty to charges of failing to provide care under the Animal Care and Protection Act.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/12/12/2444791.htm?site=idx-qld

(Subsequently charged with further offences. They were fined a total of $82K)

3. IN a bizarre case of animal cruelty, a five-week-old female puppy has been found drugged on cannabis fumes, locked inside a cupboard drawer.

Mackay police made the disturbing discovery when they were called to a premise in West Mackay on Christmas Day.

4. Earlier this month, two dogs were found locked inside a vehicle in 30-degree heat while another was seized after being beaten around the head after being used in an illegal dog fight.

http://www.dailymercury.com.au/story/2008/12/30/pup-found-drugged-locked-in-a-drawer/

5. AN IPSWICH labourer who wanted to get rid of his flatmate's cat bound the animal's legs with zip ties so it could not escape during the night, a court heard yesterday.

http://www.qt.com.au/story/2008/12/15/flatmate-guilty-animal-cruelty/

Nicky

Cup handle

What I said was The Gold Coast Bulletin had refused for years to do live exports UNTIL given a story on the AWB being involved in live exports.

I do not tell lies. I do not appreciate being called a liar.

I am not going to tolerate the unwarranted attacks on RSPCA QLD or PALE

Of all branches QLD RSPCA has really stood out with their hard working CEO Mark Townend.

Mark has been working in conjunction with us on the live export issue and he’s the ONLY one who has chaired meetings and put himself out to meet with Muslim Leaders Lawyers and others.
He is the person who introduced the new laws for Roo`s a few years back and also started RSPCA Aboriginal Inspectors.
( Now this I am sure is really going to hurt our crazy poster but BOTH of these were at our suggestion!
That’s the thing about this quite man he just listens and if he likes what he heres he gets in and gets the job done. No doubt he appreciates the efforts Of Michael Beattie and many of his staff who perform miracles with what they have.
IF ANYBODY has STOOD up to the Courts and the legal system and DEMANED a better go for Animals its Mark Townend and RSPCA QLD!

Here are just a few of RSPCA QLD special programmes
http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2003/s911930.htm
http://www.happypaws.com.au/news/rspca-rejects-kitten-killer-soldiers

http://www.rspcaqld.org.au/news/mediareleases/pets_in_crisis_dvprogram.pdf
http://www.rspcaqld.org.au/news/default.htm

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/news/queensland/bob-irwin-pushes-for-wacol-animal-hospital/2008/06/06/12

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/news/queensland/new-pet-laws-a-dogs-breakfast-says-rspca/2008/11/12/1226318724665.html

http://www.animalwelfarestandards.net.au/Submissions/Submission%2030%20-%20RSPCA%20Qld.pdf
http://www.petrescue.com.au/information_library/rescue_news/rescue_in_the_media/418

http://www.halakindmeats.com/

http://www.livexports.com/
Then of course RSPCA Pet Rescue seen on channel 7.

Nicky:

Once again we have to suffer a tirade of nonsenical rantings from Pale&IF!....Do they never get the picture?

You may have noticed in one of their recent comments that they are now accusing me of calling them liars!.....I never did,(not that I care anyway) to the best of my knowledge, say that, however I will now take this opportunity of calling "them"... ( whoever compiles their spurious offerings)... a bunch of "Phallus Craniums" who desperately need psychiatric help with maybe a little bit of shock treatment thrown in to try to stimulate their long defunct areas of grey matter!....failing that maybe a lobotomy could be in order,....however there has to be a brain for a lobotomy to be applied!.... Hopefully that would bring an end to their ongoing massive persecution complex!

Acts of cruelty in Queensland seem now to be an everyday occurrence and the whole issue needs deep and drastic investigation and interventionto find out by whom and why these despicable acts are being committed against so many innocent animals!.....This state never used to be this way,.....so who is to blame?

Hello Cuphandle
As you probably know, I am far away from Queensland. I understand that there, unlike other states and territories, the RSPCA has responsibility for "companion" animals and the DPI for farmed and other animals, although reading some of the cases the RSPCA in Queensland has undertaken, they appear to be doing a top job in the face of a never-ending rise in some truly vicious and horrible crime. One of those who tortured the puppy "Peanut" to death is now apparently trying to mount a psychiatric defence. There has been international condemnation of these monsters, which I hope the Justice system there will take into account. What makes a difference is a massive outpouring of public opinion to the authorities to make them do their job.

ALQ (Animal Liberation Queensland) and AAQ (Animal Activism Queensland) both do an excellent job, but find it hard to get the authorities to act on complaints.

I think I'm probably better off totally ignoring PALE in future - they corrupt all threads started in good faith, and by responding, I seem to exacerbate the persecution complex. I might start a new thread discussing who is responsible for what in each state, beginning with Queensland. It does seem that the RSPCA there goes above and beyond the call of duty at times - more than can be said for the organisation in other states. Farmed animals always seem to slip through the cracks.

Among my pet hates is the animal transport "regulations". Did you see the case of the wild goats transported from Bourke to the Northern Territory? More than 300 died, either on the transport or had to be destroyed, and the penalty worked out to $15 per goat. Proponents of the live export trade claim that if live exports end animals will be routinely transported across the country, regardless of weather conditions. Animals Angels followed a sheep transport from WA to SA, and the police had to be called - the journey time was something like 70 hours non-stop. No-one enforces journey times (where they exist) across state boundaries.

Cheers
Nicky

http://www.animalactivism.org/campaigns/rspca-cruelty/

Anybody interested may open the above AAQ link to read the truth about AAQs position regarding RSPCA.

We tried years ago to explain to Debra Morris that RSPCA require more laws.

Animal Welfare was made pretty much self regulated with only codes of practise as a 'guidline' when it comes to farm animals.

CEO RSPCA attended our office on the Gold Coast and spent the best part of the day explaining to AAQs they can not take evidence to court that has been gained by break and enter or tresspass( much as they would love to)

What was said was until these veggie groups work WITH RSPCA instead of against them - that will suit the cruel breeders just fine.
Here are the real facts about RSPCA and as much as I agree RSPCA QLD leads by a mile we realy need to look at the structure of RSPCA National body.

Are RSPCA CEOs and others paid by the Government. If wages are made up of Federal and state Government funding for RSPCA Heads CEOs and Inspectors. Where would that leave perhaps anybody who steps outside that white line.?

How is the RSPCA board at National office structured?

To whom are they answerable to if funds from Government make up their wages.

There are some fantasic people working in RSPCA and some duds IMO just like anywhere else.

http://www.rspcavic.org/rspca_services/inspectorate.htm

The biggest problem in this countyry are people protesting against others eating meat.

It works against the very animals we are trying to help and gives the Government and media plenty of scope to ride off all groups as veggie exremists.

IMO Animal Welfare was set up in the first place as a token gesture so the public would think everything was under control

Its FAR from it!

PALE, do we CARE about this old rubbish?

Nicky

http://www.abc.net.au/news/tag/animal-welfare/

To say who ‘cares’ is irresponsible. It gives a false impression that this type of campaigning is in the past – which sadly is untrue.

You stated AAQ work united with RSPCA QLD- when their web sites reads the opposite. Your information was misleading and dishonest.

It also unfair fair to AAQ itself because whatever they believe they have the right not to be misquoted.

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,24411799-2,00.html

http://www.animalliberation.com.au/otherorg/action/barnlaid.htm

http://www.rspca.org.au/policy/d.asp

http://www.animalliberation.com.au/otherorg/action/barnlaid.htm

The links above show a long record of inta fighting between RSPCA and Animal Liberation groups who support vegetarian diets only.

Before we get into much more we should ask ourselves who has exposed acts of gross cruelty that otherwise would have probably gone unreported.

* By large we believe that would have to do be the Animal Liberation groups throughout Australia as well as individual members of the public.*
‘However the political slant on Animal Welfare in general must be addressed.

So if the peak group Animals Australia AL and the other 40 or 50 animal welfare groups who work with them will declare their position once and for all it would be a big step forward.

As Animals Australia have pledged themselves as the other peak body for Animal Welfare (together with Animal Liberation) it would seem we are badly in need of their organisations to come out and declare they are “not ”a vegetarian group ‘ OR they are.

The views of the 96% of the main stream Australian public must be represented.

And it’s important they stick to which ever one they choose both publicly and privately as a matter of policy once a for all.

If they have been so vocal against RSPCA and especially Hugh Wirth why did they unite with him with HWC?

The only head to push the co joint ventures working with Farmers and Muslim Leaders of Australia was once again the RSPCA CEO QLD Mr Mark Townend.

RSPCA QLD CEO has often said until Animal Liberation and others work WITH RSPCA to demand better laws to protect animals the animals will continue to suffer.

PALE, I am sick to death of this, and of you, and not prepared to argue this rubbish with you any longer.

Nicky

There is nothing to argue about. I corrected your post where you claimed AAQ work united with RSPCA QLD nothing more.

You see unlike you we encourage anybody and everybody to show an interest in Animal Welfare and the more the better.

Now as far as the bone of this thread goes RSPCA wants more control over puppies exported.

I already pointed out the X Ministers advisor denied puppies were exported ( dogs etc from Australia to Asia.

That was raised at a meeting we held with federal Government before the of parties.

I named the person several times so if you really cared you would thank me for that information and the fact we took the time to call the meeting in the first place.

I think Hugh has had twenty years to raise this and he knows the Aussies love dogs puppies.

He knows full well all hell would break loose if he gave it up to the public through the media.

So why havent we heard him doing this earlier.
Of course! they are selling them for commercial purpose.

bUT before giving RSPCA National more control lets find out if they are going to hand that backk in the form of a MOU with DPI AQIS like live exports etc

PALE, you do what you want to do. I'm not debating anything with you any more. It's just too tedious.

Nicky

It would certainly be better if everyone concentrated on the puppies- including Hugh and RSPCA National.

It is to your credit you raised this important issue.

This is all Hugh or RSPCA National has to do. =

* Ask AQIS for a copy of their consignment papers.
.* That way they CAN be traced.*

Surely if the RSPCA National requested copies from AQIS it shouldn’t be a big problem.

Hugh would know he could always speak with the: Special Ministers that report directly back to the PM working with RSPCA if AQIS give problems obtaining copies of paper work.

Once obtaining copies of the paper work (tag batch numbers) they or anybody else can trace them to see where the puppies ended up.

Naturally this would have to be an ongoing arrangement not just a one off.

Perhaps Hugh could then share the information with some of the Handle with Care HWC members he ‘claims to have united with.

We spoke with very nice lady (who was in charge at the time of the area in AQIS) where any dogs over a year ago. She told a different story to the one given us by Anne the then Federal Minister advisor for Agriculture =

[PDF]
Issue7 April-May 2006 Talking Shop OvertheFence Animal Welfare GMO ...
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
previously,and. for the lastthree years,Ann McDonald has been. headof OIECC and isnow adviser to the new. Federal Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries ...
www.nasaa.com.au/data/pdfs/Organic%20Insights%20Issue%207.pdf - Similar pages



We took a call from a dog lover and reporter back then very keen to get to the bottom of the truth about Australia exporting dog’s puppies. Sent that information others.
Many old media icons and dog lovers are interested to get to the bottom of this.
I hope your friends are following up on it.

PALE, you are the one claiming an association with the RSPCA, I suggest that you use it.
Nicky

Nicky

We work in conjunction with RSPCA QLD 'only' and solely on live exports.

I would hate to jeopardise that work with RSPCA QLD by getting up National Office nose.
I make comments about intensive farming and topics such as this thread but they are replies to yourself and Dickie mostly.

I simply tried to suggest things and inform you what’s been said in the past when that particular topic was raise with Federal Government.

Anyway somebody must be looking at this already imo otherwise I don’t think there would have been a media R from Hugh.

It’s very clear to prove these pups are going for food we need the paper work.
It’s equally as clear AQIS will refuse to make those public claiming in business confidentiality.
It’s even clearer as AQIS is a Government body ALP will not want the public to get a whiff if they are exporting dogs and puppies to be boiled in a pot and cooked alive.( If that is what’s happening)

Fact is the only organisation that would stand a chance of demanding the papers would be RSPCA National or=

State Branch RSPCA CEOs where the puppy factories operate.

If it’s Victoria then it really IS up to Hugh to take legal independent advice as to what his position is.

If it’s in Victoria and he is aware, as RSPCA President there he has a clear duty of care to inform himself beyond a doubt just what is happening to these puppies and where they are going.

Now if he or anybody else in the same position fails to do that I should think the Government AQIS would have a great scape goat down the track.

Unless of course that’s all part of his job description anyway.

In which case it would probably be business as usual and the odd press release if someone else were to be sniffing around.

PALE, tell Hugh Wirth, not me.

Nicky

Well in that case dont bother opening threads about that topi

I shall open threads on any topics I see fit (and leave them when you bring them down to the usual vendettas, at which point everyone else abandons them anyway and they descend into the usual rubbish).

Nicky

Pardon.
You opended a thread about something in which we happend to raise with Federal Government 18 months ago- That is ALL.

Had you really cared for the animals you would have welcomed the comments I made.
I think your agenda has been made very clear. Suddenly you have no interest in the puppies .
Cant say I am surprised

PALE, not at all. I simply have no interest in debating anything with you. I am happy to respond to anything from sensible, rational people. You have driven all of them away, as usual, so there is little to be gained from pursuing this thread any further. It was for the purpose of awareness raising, and it achieved that. You then brought it down to personalities (yet again) so I'm not responding to that any more.

Nicky

Vendettas, Nicky

You would think that how typical.

My God are you really are that insular.

Our organisation works with RSPCA QLD and are proud to say you couldnt meet a nicer bunch of people to work with.

While I have openly commented many times on the structure of RSPCA National body there is certainly nothing wrong with the structure of most people within RSPCA.

ALL! of whom warned us about the out right war going on between your veggie friends trying to take over RSPCA. Yes we KNOW your lot hate us because we stand firm with RSPCA Nicky.

In response to your comment regarding the amount of posters three of our new lawyer members are also posters on OLO.

FYI ALL contacted us regarding your outragous attacks on our organisation. - 'FACT'

Before you came into our threads Animal Wwelfare was the bussiest posts on this forum bar none.

Many of those same posters have emailed us. There has been all sorts of suggestions made in regards to attempts for three years of your extremists veggie friends putting down our organisation.

The information in which was posted regarding the puppies being exported was the action by which the lawyers decided it should be taken.

Its good legal advise that I personally put to a pannel of lawyers eighteen months ago.

I then sent that information regarding the meeting with federal Minister to Suzzanne Cazz and AA.

Which is possibly why its been raised now. It usually takes around that amount of time- often longer before they catch on.

You know AA dont you Nicky. That the people you denied knowing for three years (only to forget) and latyer addmitt you attended a meeting where you met Gleynse.

Pls make sure you pass on that legal advise.
I am sure you will - wont you.

Yeah, right, PALE. Re-read my last three posts and try to understand them. I am simply not going to continue debating nonsense with you. Is that clear enough?

Nicky

Nicky

Yes of course/ You run off now. I think maybe we should stick around for the sake of the animals.

Someone should I guess explore the reasons a person would open a thread then suddenly not want to know about conversations at meetings on that same topic with the federal Ministers advisor or AQIS staff.
You opended a thread about RSPCA and puppies being exported.
We responded with information. We disclosed that this has been raised with federal Gov in the past. Also that they denied ANY dogs were exported for food to Asia. I even gave you the name of that person.
But your free to run off of course while we continue to post about the pupies being bred for export in Australia.- perhaps? and what possible steps Hugh and RSPCA National might be able to take to ensure they are not going to be bolied alive in a back alley somewhere.

Pls dont slam the door on the way out.

But you provided no proof, as usual, then contributed nothing worth debating, just your usual claptrap attempts to discredit anyone and everyone. Face it, you have nowhere left to go and no-one wants to engage in any forum with you. This is it for me on this thread, it achieved its purpose before you entered and corrupted it.

Nicky

Nicky
The difference is ‘unlike you’ we already met with the Federal Government in person regarding this matter- and other 18months ago. I am not responsible if your friends failed to tell you that. Perhaps they felt it was privy information especially as it was at that same meeting alligations were raised that Hugh and the UK RSPCA CEO pledged ongoing support to the then Minister of Ag for live exports.
They must be happy with the results however given that united themselves with HWC with Hugh as their head.:)
Proof-
At that meeting among others were two lawyers. Despite which I don’t have to prove anything to you of all people.

It’s up to RSPCA National or the State branches to lobby AQIS for a copy of the paper work. That is the only way.

Maybe at a stretch you might find some helpful feds or special branch following up on illegal activities.
Its RSPCA nationals job to ensure that these puppies are not going for food.
Let’s give Hugh time to request details through AQIS.

Can’t imagine him being given entry for starters. Then there is the funds to follow through, powers in another country...

It’s the same old same old.

Just like RSPCA have no powers to enter into abattoirs here in Australia.

It’s a well oiled system.

Our Animals in Australia have no protection and it’s a dam disgrace and nothing bar a case against the Government will change that.
Which was offered to Animals Australia years ago and Glenyse declined to meet with the QC.

In fact she claimed they never came to QLD. Only to arrive in Brisbane 3weeks later.


A well oiled system indeed and if you cant see that many Animal Welfare groups are nothing more than a political joke then I cant help you

Perhaps RSPCA Hugh Wirth and RSPCA National could encourage also that the new ID tags be extended to puppies in mill factories.
This enables them to trace the animal for thousands of miles.
AQIS could issue Hugh with A cut lunch but he wouldnt need a compass to track down the destination of these puppies being exported from Australia.

Food For Thought.

RSPCA already offer ID tags for peoples pets. Why not puppy factorys and even extend it to pet barns.
All Animals should be able to be traced be they dogs cats or cattle.
This service has exsisted since 1997 - So why in 2008 are we not using it.
I seem to recall the Australian Federation Of Islamic Councils put forth the ID tag proposal to the Animal Welfare Senate Enquiry as a way to improve animal welfare and keep costs down
Tracking is the only way.
Lets hope the RSPCA move quickly to introduce this as law. After all they protest the lomg haulage of live stock.
This device is perfect for All stock and Puppies dogs cats..

I cannot believe that people would accept painful ear tags for puppies like they do for other "livestock" (note the distinction). What is wrong with microchipping for all domestic animals? Nah ... it's easier to attach painful, possibly (mooted) multiple tags to sheep, cattle, pigs and goats.

Nicky

Nicky

I was refering to the 'same' tags used by RSPCA and vets for dogs at present.
If we dont get a Bill up running on this one its going to become no different to the export of goat sheep etc.

So just for once can you try not to go into beef up mode towards us.

There is no one person or organisation that can get things done for the animals.

The only way is for everybody to work together .

I have absolutely no idea what sort of tags you are talking about, and as usual there is no clarification, but microchipping is the only permanent means of identification/tracking. It should be compulsory for all dogs and cats as a minimum, and is, in many jurisdictions, for dogs at least.

I was referring to the ear tags that are essentially stapled into the ears of "livestock", which would attract cruelty charges if it were done to dogs.

Nor is it true to say "everyone must work together". Different groups and different individuals have different ideologies, philosophies and strategies, and they work (in almost all cases) in harmony with, or complement each other.

Nicky

Nicky
If you read the report from Farmers on line you will see they claim to have made a major breakthrough with tags allowing them to know the whereabouts of animals.
Now I am sure they didnt do it with puppy mills in mind- but there should be little reason it could not be modified.

Given that there are claims by officials we have no way of tracking puppies/ dogs being exported from Australia it seems worth a look.

It really seems to me that no matter what I comment on - you simply wish to be disagreeable and attack every thing suggested

May I draw your attention to post above disclosing our meeting with federal Government where this matter was raised.

It`s gone over your head that the Federal Ministers advisor declaired no dogs puppies *were sold/exported for the purpose of food*.

May I again try to point out to you -

Given they have *already stated they have no proof or evidence* *thats a mighty funny thing for a Federal Ministers advisor to assure anybody.*

Whats standing out like fish out of water is your lack of interest!

As for your last comment sadly nothing could be further from the truth.
Even Hugh Wirth addressed the National press on the long standing inta fighting between Animal groups.

Its been that way we were warned for over twenty years so we are looking at the heads who have been there that period of time.

Its a know FACT that there has been a war between RSPCA and other Animal groups trying to take over to the point RSPCA

It got so bad they had to issue a warning publicly to board members.
Not to mention a five page thread in the Australian + The four corner Blind Eye- So whom are youi trying to kid!

Here we are- your favoured web site=

http://www.liveexportshame.com/publications/alv/Writers%20Group%20Newsletter%206.pdf

http://www.rspcawatchdog.org/home.htm

I posted the AAQ site up last time you mislead the public.
Do you want me to repost it- or perhaps others.

Or, can we move on help these animals.

PALE, are you telling us you see something wrong with the efforts of the ALV Writers' Group? Seriously? And nothing wrong with the actions of the RSPCA in the matters mentioned in that Newsletter?

And you have a problem with "A Blind Eye" reporting on the conflicts of interest in the RSPCA? Only last week it was revealed that RSPCA NSW is under investigation over just that issue.

I take it you are therefore against any form of bringing gross animal abuse to the attention of the public. In fact - perhaps you are, because I don't see PALE doing any of the hard stuff.

As for misleading the public, you have turned that into an art form.

As for translating sheep ear tags to puppies ... I can't wait to see that. Microchipping should be mandatory for all puppies (not useless tags which can be removed at any time).

Nicky

Nicky
No I was pointing out your dishonesty by your claims in all or most cases groups work in harmoney to compliment each other.

For twenty years prior to our organisation opening there has been NOTHING other than inta fighting and disunity.

Harmoney thats a joke! Its anything but and we were targetted right from the start being seen as the enermy because we chose to work with RSPCA QLD.


We support many organisations and in fact some of my personal best friends are indeed with AL.


I think the blind eye was needed and I have no problem with anybody highlighting animal cruelty.

I have also gone on record now many times pointing out whilst we are lucky at the moment with our CEO RSPCA QLD -there seems to be some loose ends about the structure of RSPCA National in general.

Nicky you really have a problem and few people working in animal welfare do not know you.

Nobody wants anything to do with people who just wish to cause trouble.

I have broken my promise and tried to include you in my posting but again I must say its not in the interest of animal welfare to contiune. Your only agenda is to cause trouble .
Do not address any further posts to me and do not follow me from thread to thread as you have for three years.
I will not reply.

Promises promises!

The RSPCA is at odds in some states with the REAL animal advocates because it fails in its statutory duty. For that it deserves to be exposed. No-one has a problem with it if it does its job.

There has never, to my knowledge, been a report of any disharmony amongst other groups, most of whom are members of Animals Australia (straight from its website). Some work differently from others, but their focus is the same; that's why they are in harmony. It is only PALE which cannot get along with anyone, and leave them alone to do their work without making continued and consistent attempts to discredit them.

If the RSPCA wants to be associated with PALE, does it also want to be seen to be profiteering from slaughterhouses? Probably. It seems to have no problem ignoring appalling abuses on pig, battery hen and broiler farms. Come to think of, it, nor does PALE. Nor does it bother attending live export ship loadings to enforce State legislation in WA (where Animals Angels picks up the slack), SA and Victoria.

Those are the differences, and that is where any disharmony is.

Nicky

I'd say that's a very accurate assessment you've made of AA and their affiliations Nicky. From my observations they all support each other and it is refreshing to witness such dedication and solidarity.

Learn from Nicky's post PALE. Your own posts are continually peppered with malice towards those you foolishly perceive as "competition" yet it is only you who has a self-interest.

Only you wear the leper's bell PALE.

"Do not address any further posts to me and do not follow me from thread to thread as you have for three years.
I will not reply."

Nicky follow you around PALE? Get a grip on yourself woman. You're the stalker!

I trust your threat of not replying to Nicky's post extends to me too?

What a relief! Yay!

Auf Wiedersehen Fraulein!

*I'd say that's a very accurate assessment you've made of AA and their affiliations *

I think you have made a bluder as AA wasnt mentioned. But now you raise it its very clear- and has been for a long long time this is where its coming from IMOP. Dickie you are on record saying you knew nobody at Animals Australia and made comments as a member of the public only.
Of course I knew that most of your comments were pretty much coppied from their site.
Then you blew your cover by leaving your address contact at Animals Australia.
All messages may be left at AA you posted. ( With a warning to Yabby not to bother trying etc..

You know its a funny thing because I few weeks ago an email arrived. I opended it and it was a bla bla on Glenyse.
When i contacted the uni who had put it up for a meeting they said they most certainly did not send it.
It seems to somebody went to all the trouble of copyiong the doc and then just posting that part to us.

No prise for guessing who. pathetic.

Agreed Dickie we will not post replies to you either BUT be warned if you attack our organisation we will take steps to put an end to it once and for all.
Tell your friends their little army didnt make them look too good at all.
Anybody who can read knows there`s been a clear agenda - and most guess where from.

So its agreed we will not post to each other- Nicky Dickie or PALE
make sure you stick to it.

Hey, Dickie, another load of unsubstantiated, baseless claptrap, I see, this time with you as the target of the threats and abuse. I can't wait to see what the "steps" to be taken might be {pity about the "bluder" and the "prise" ...

PALE, you never shut up about Animals Australia or Glenys Oogjes. What does it matter if Dickie, or anyone else, does or doesn't know anyone there, for God's sake? I've already said that I met Glenys Oogjes once at the Animal Law Conference at UNSW in July 2007 (to which PALE couldn't be bothered sending representation; maybe it would all have been above the intellectual grasp of anyone at PALE, whose memberhip would probably fit in a phone box); however it was a landmark conference which anyone worth knowing in the movement attended.

Speaking of stalking, Dickie, I fear you are correct, PALE stalks both of us relentlessly. My ship thread seems to have escaped its attentions though. Strange for an organisation claiming to be at the forefront of reforming the live export industry, or just simple ignorance?

Do us all a favour, PALE, and MOVE ON.

Nicky

I make the following statement in defence of RSPCA QLD and to some extend RSPCA in general.
It is not to be taken as a response to posters tagged Nicky Dicky who follow the vegetarian ideology and who are opposed to RSPCA there for also our organisation as we work in conjunction on the live Animal Exports.

The RSPCA have a difficult job.
They are the only hands on organisation in Australia responding to thousands of complaints for Animal abuse. Their staff is stretched beyond belief. Most work many extra hours without pay because of their dedication to animals.

RSPCA are NOT ignoring appalling conditions in pig or battery hens.
Here is there long standing position on such matters.

http://www.rspcaqld.org.au/campaigns/batteryhens/
http://www.rspcaqld.org.au/campaigns/consumersguide.htm

They are powerless to do much because the Governments have kept them without powers to just walk in. Even if they could the Government have passed legislation that animals may be kept in areas so tiny they can not move.

The RSPCA CAN NOT act outside the law and have pleaded with all groups for many years to get behind them and lobby the Government for better laws.

Sadly instead of other groups getting behind the RSPCA to support them to lobby Government for improvements some have spent almost twenty years trying to overide them for their own personal agendas.
RSPCA have told these people. If you break and enter premises and tress pass we can not take these complaints to court.

Most of the public think RSPCA are just allowed to enter premises to inspect such places as abattoirs and intensive farms. This is not the case. In an attempt to do something for the animals they have managed to work with some people in the industry but not all.

RSPCA QLD considers each barn bird is one less in cages. While nobody said its perfect without much tougher laws they are powerless.

Working WITH the industry instead of against them gives us hope.

Protesting against people animal products sets Animal Welfare back and plays into the hands of the cruel operators and intensive industry.

Nicky, Dickie:

I have been off-line for a period of time due to problems resulting from electrical storm activity ( blew my dial-up lead connecting to my computer!)

I have just down-loaded 100 odd messages and left this Forum thread until last to allow me time to digest the past transgressions from the "hi-jackers"!

I am amazed and astounded to read the ongoing balderdash, accompanied by the usual spate of mis-spellings and very poor compository offerings that emanate unceasingly from PALE&IF.

Why do you PALE&IF have to jump into every thread and thence attempt to dominate the proceedings until finally every other contributor leaves the thread out of sheer frustration, or like Nicky, has to continue to reply to the tirade of denigrating personal statements to try to retain some sort of sanity in what has seemingly become a "Monty Pythonesque Circus" with a cast of the usual "village idiots"?

Maybe PALE&IF should change it`s name to PATCOB (People against throwing children off bridges) in which it may serve a more useful purpose in it`s constant arguing against other contributors with it`s failed efforts to appear a dominant figure in "jabberwockish-speak"

Cuphandle

Your last comment displays how truely insensive some people can be.
Actually the last three comments highlight that.
At a time of such tradegy for a family that you could post something so utterly insensitive is beyond the PALE

Likewise Dicky and Nicky for the enormous efforts put into improving animal Welfare Standards by Lyn. These types of comments reflect on the Animals themselves.

Shame on you.

Hey Cuphandle, welcome back, I have missed you! I'm glad your computer is up and running again.

You are absolutely right, of course, and I probably play into PALE's hands by even bothering to correct the misrepresentation, inaccuracies, untruths, threats and personal and general vilification directed towards me and everyone else who has disagreed with PALE.

Take for example "Government have (sic) passed legislation that animals may be kept in areas so tiny they can not move". Governments have done no such thing. They have enacted animal welfare legislation, which in theory underpins "Codes of Practice". CoP's are not legislation, they are agreed to by the Primary Industries Ministerial Council. If the RSPCA were entirely truthful, I think it would be revealed that its inspectors do in fact have right of entry to everywhere (except slaughterhouses ... if I took that thought a little further, I wonder if that has anything to do with why PALE wants to open Muslim slaughterhouses ... beyond the profit motive, that is)

As for my criticising Lyn (White, I presume) I would like to see PALE find a quote from me where I have done that, since such a statement is clearly the product of a deluded mind, or something they drink and/or smoke in their members' phone box. Nor have I expressed blanket criticism of the RSPCA. I will criticise it where I believe it has failed in its statutory duty, however.

As for the indictment on your statement, that is just fatuous in the extreme - it would be good to see PALE direct its energies into something that will actually achieve a result of some sort, but I think that is unlikely.

Nicky

(Continued)

I have also clarified on the other thread why the various groups enter intensive farming operations, and it is not to provide "evidence" for the RSPCA, which should be gathering its own evidence. I imagine they do it (at considerable risk to their safety, and possibly personal and professional standing) to bring the conditions in these places to the attention of the public in the expectation that such footage and other evidence would embarass the RSPCA into carrying out its statutory function. All too often, that doesn't happen.

A quick look at AAQ's website (which I note has not been updated for a while (so much for PALE presenting that as recent evidence that AAQ "works against the RSPCA"), Animals Angels (which picks up the RSPCA slack at live export loadings in Fremantle), and Animal Liberation NSW and Victoria (at least), the evidence is quite clear. RSPCA NSW is currently under investigation for paying its board members legal fees to undertake its prosecutions (internal corruption). It also receives royalties from one of the worst battery egg farming operations in the country. RSPCA WA has two farmers on its State Council who sell animals to the live export trade, despite RSPCA stated "policy" against the trade. One has an old conviction for cruelty to animals. Need I go on?

Nicky

Cuphandle said

Why do you PALE&IF have to jump into every thread ;;;

Glenyse, Suzzanne Cazz, Dawn, Debbie Morris, the comments below speak for themselves.
Now we comment number one because WE raised this at Federal level well before you- as always. Despite that why would you have a problem with WHOEVER was speaking up for animals.

This type of attention to our organisation has attracted interested media.
They want to know whats going on between different groups

Keep going and you some might find yourselves being asked why you have driven such a nasty campainge against an organisation working with a rspca branch.=

*I am amazed and astounded to read the ongoing balderdash, accompanied by the usual spate of mis-spellings and very poor compository offerings that emanate unceasingly from PALE&IF.*
*
to dominate the proceedings until finally every other contributor leaves the thread out of *sheer frustration, or like Nicky, has to continue to reply to the tirade of denigrating personal statements to try to retain some sort of sanity in what has seemingly become a "Monty Pythonesque Circus" with a cast of the usual "village idiots"?*

Maybe PALE&IF should change it`s name to PATCOB (People against throwing children off bridges)

Nicky said
since such a statement is clearly the product of a deluded mind, or something they drink and/or smoke in their members' phone box

And this is supposed to convey precisely what? It names people who, so far as I know, are not contributors on these fora at all, and does not even give an indication of who they are, apart from the obvious usual menacing of who I understand to be Glenys Oogjes of Animals Australia, and who CAN claim to have some "runs on the board", unlike PALE. For heavens sake, just what is this rubbish supposed to mean?
Nicky

Suzzanne
It might pay you to mention to Glenyse and your other friends that the media have contacted us on less less than 'three ocassions' in the past wanting to know whats going on between Animal Welfare groups and why such inta fighting.

They were interested in our break through and clear leadship of approaching our Muslim Leaders.

Even more so when we explained we invited others to join us in our MOU with Muslim Leaders and they declined.

Stunned when told about the descion then to approach them without us being present.

The letters. The phone calls. The refusal of our organisation to join certain groups.

The emails sent out. People being instructed not to work with PALE an organisation working in conjunction with RSPCA QLD.

You know how the media love a good story. Peter McGrauan is in a perfect position to also make comment if we asked.

We have declined so far in the hope for the animals sake we could all work together.

One things for sure we have NOT decided against taking these discusting comments on a contiunal basis against a group of animal lover working with RSPCA QLD to court.

You are the main offender. Its pure jealousy because we did something your lot should have twenty years ago.
You are the main offender and if Robert and George are forced to take this to court your going to cause a lot of work and trouble for GY also.

Thats a nice way of repaying someone for providing a FREE service

Try thinking of others for a change and post about Animal welfare - minus the slander against our organisation and people personally.

Cant you post about Animal Welfare without mentioning pale. We have zero problem posting without mentioning Animals Australia or PETA.

Why not make that a rule Gy ?

PALE, as I suggested on the Sea Kittens thread, you should address your comments to the people you name here, seeking to vilify and discredit them. They are unlikely to read the venom you continually spew into these threads. I'm sure they are all contactable via websites with which they are associated.Just "baby steps" type research. But as I said, be careful what you wish for, I'm sure that they would have excellent lawyers who would no doubt explain to you in little words the laws of defamation (slander and libel).

You should also get it through your head that no-one cares what if any relationship exists between you and RSPCA Queensland. It is blindingly obvious even to people far removed from the movement that your behaviour that has seen you excluded from every other organisation.

A comment from Peter McGauran? If you want to be associated with such a person, then go for it. It pains me to give your claims the slightest credibility, but the media will have contacted the others you mention, and got the true story. No publicity there, just one so-called "group" doing its damnedest to discredit everyone and everything else.

Nor do I see a day when PALE could contain itself from its hateful, vicious commentary about Animals Australia, WSPA, PETA, or anyone else who has disagreed with it; trying to force its agenda on everyone regardless of the damage it has done to the great work of others. RObert and others summed this up on other threads a couple of years ago, even listing some of the people who have been vilified by PALE over that period.

Wake up and grow up. Subscribe to some newsfeeds and try to inform yourself (and learn to spell people's names, properly cite quotes, only post in one ID, and learn some grammar, spelling, formatting and punctuation. You must be seriously off everyone's email lists if you don't know what is really going on out there, and clearly you don't. And jealous of you? Do get over yourself. No-one is that nuts.

Nicky

Nicky

I haven’t read your post. "We won’t be reading anything more you write."

You’re so darn selfish and self centred.’ You just go on and on. Everybody else is doing as much as possible to help the victims in the fire and Animals

We tend to work with the lawful authorities with our projects.
That doesn’t mean we don’t support other peoples efforts.

RSPCA for example "have hundreds" of people working putting in their own time. We don’t hear from these wonderful people just you with your jealous ego problem.

I feel sorry for Animals Australia as you have linked yourself to them by mentioning them on almost every post.

How embarrassing for them.

Do try to do something more constructive for your own sake.

You’re clearly not busy in your present role.

Whatever you see ‘ perceive` that to be.

Yeah, right, Whatever. Unfortunately, all you seem to be able to do is vilify and try to discredit everyone else. The RSPCA must be horribly embarrassed by your claimed link with it, and if they knew the extent of it, I doubt if they would thank you.

Nicky

Isn`t if funy how people rubbish RSPCA PALE never actually do anything themselves. Have we ever seen any others actually doing anything =No?



Yet they have the cheek to rubbish our projects. A few little catty girlies sitting in an office with a computer- While RSPCA gets out and does the hard yards and pale actually help farmers and come up with some real projects.

Now If I hadnt personally approached the Muslim Community it still would never had been done.

Yet do we get gee thanks- No way.

Just fear and jealousy which dont kid yourself everybodies picked out years ago.

Many OLO posters have emailed us through our site asking offering to help with hay for the fire victims.

Thanks to those people. They all said the same. They didnt want to do into our links because Nicky would targett them in the forums.

Yep I reckon people have it figured out- no worries

PALE, do get over yourself. You don't know who anyone is, or what anyone does because you are so totally out of touch with reality. On another planet really. And make no mistake, RSPCA branches have plenty of money given to them to do what they do. Sadly,much of that money is in investments rather than being spent on animals (the purpose for which it is given). You don't know anything about that because you don't know anything about anything at all.

Your memory is also decidedly unreliable; you yourself claimed to have severed your '"MoU" with Muslim leaders' some time ago.

Certainly no-one, so far as anyone could tell, holds you in any form of esteem over which they could possibly be jealous. A quick review over old threads and other contributors clearly indicates that.

Your petty, vindictive little vilification agenda against everyone and everything is so pitifully obvious. You are a failure, and worse, not smart enough to recognise it. And do cut the "BS" as well; no-one believes you.

Nicky

Nicky
The do get over yourself , is- cheap, unladylike and gives a bad look to animal welfare. You can do better than that.

.* You don't know who anyone is, or what anyone does because you are so totally out of touch with reality.*

Nicky,} :} Believe that, if it makes you feel better, - but rest assured ‘we do’- right down to the “lucky” last. Very interesting actually, + in one case sad, upsetting and disappointing TBO

*. Sadly, much of that money is in investments rather than being spent on animals (the purpose for which it is given). You don't know anything about that because you don't know anything about anything at all.*

Nicky, RSPCA have been bailed out before. All organisations invest for the future. Now if you’re saying funds are hidden from public- that’s different. Is that what you are saying?

I have no problem with anything you say, about RSPCA National or other branches. I only work with RSPCA QLD for live exports. Nothing more.
Don’t be so sure we have not had a bird’s eye view and hold our own concerns.

* Our problem is we don’t trust your friend* to take ‘anything’ to her. *

After all Nicky, you yourself come in here and say things about RSPCA as you have above- Yet you said you typed the HWC Doc.?

So tell me Nicky, as you don’t trust RSPCA, has it ever occurred to you to ask her why your mob in bed with Hugh.?

Or do you just love animals so much you get emotional and don’t think for yourself.

Sure, I know they have had twenty years on boards together- but that just makes things more Suss

Come on Nicky why did your lot put Hugh in charge of HWC after Years of bagging him? Answer that- You cant can you. It confuses you doesnt it?
Do not be so blind Nicky we are not the animals enermy.

I tell you about the MOU next post OK- Just to make you happy. That’s if you talk like a lady pls..

PALE&IF: << ...gives a bad look to animal welfare... >>

I agree.

PALE, when did I say that RSPCA that funds are being hidden from the public? Who knows? You clearly don't, nor do you know what I know. And what HWC document/s did I say I had typed? I did a bit of research stuff for them, but nothing like what I suspect you are hallucinating about.

I also said that it would not have been my choice for Wirthless to be the spokesperson for HWC, and since I have no influence with the people who made the decision, obviously I have no idea why it was made. No secrets there.

As for my "friend" as you put it, I take it that this is just another cheap shot at Glenys Oogjes. Why would she even give you the "time of day" after all the vitriol you have directed at her? That's quite apart from the fact that it would not be within that organisation's brief to deal with any such irregularities; RSPCA branches should be, and are, oversighted by the relevant Department's of Consumer Affairs within state and territory governments (who will not act because it is not in their interests to do so).

In the light of your consistent vilification, discrediting and abuse of everyone in the animal welfare movement, I'd suggest that sanctimoniousness and pitiful attempts at sarcasm do not become you either (or maybe they do ....).

Nicky

Pls Nicky read it properly – goodness.

I said
RSPCA have been bailed out before. They were warned last time by Government .Do NOT ask again

So I ‘suppose’ they are putting something away. I don’t know- do you?.

I am trying to be fair. That’s despite the fact I am not happy either with head office- like yourself TBO

*I also said that it would not have been my choice for Wirthless to be the spokesperson for HWC, and since I have no influence with the people who made the decision, obviously I have no idea why it was made. No secrets there.*

WE WOULDN’T SAY THAT!! We think there’s plenty of secrets there!

Twenty years of the same two sitting on any board and its time for a change sorry! Put Mark Pearson Dawn Free Ranger and Pig Farmer there instead and Watch the difference!!

Nicky
As far as we are concerned you have been very unfair.
You have always maintained you’re not connected with anybody. Yet you’re so defensive. Had you of ever said ok tell me what happened– and really listened that would have been different.

You don’t even know why she’s got ‘everybody’ upset. You never asked you don’t care. That makes you a very unfair person in our member’s eyes.
You don’t know why we work with RSPCA QLD. You don’t know why we were brought into it. forget it ok .

; RSPCA branches should be, and are, oversighted by the relevant Department's of Consumer Affairs within state and territory governments (who will not act because it is not in their interests to do so).

Hang on there boards must be answerable to somebody.

Your so nasty , thats your problem. No ned to talk like that.The sanctimoniousness and pitiful attempts at sarcasm are directed by you to us.


Your friend originally argued with me that the Minister of Trade had NOTHING to live with live exports- rather it was the minister of AG HUH?

Come on Nicky- Wake up!