Monday, May 24, 2010

EWA "Tootin Their Own Horn" on All That They Have Done to End Horse Slaughter and Why They Wont Do More

OK so I am not too popular in the anti horse-slaughter advocate / rescue world, mostly for what is perceived by some as my "extremist" views, see;

Not Really Rescue Yahoo Group;

and also for my own "rescue rules" I have set for my own little rescue operation, simple rules that set us apart from (see above)that not many other "rescues" will agree with. Wonder what their problem with these few rules could be? Check them out in the link below to see;

but still, the war to end horse slaughter is not about "person" or persons, or "rescue rules" or not,....its about getting the war against horse slaughter won. We must get over our petti differences and UNITE for a common cause which is ultimately, to end horse slaugher once and for all and forever by getting our federal bill (HR 503) passed...or so I thought, though by message in EWAs blurb below, looks like I am wrong again....just like when I said there is no such thing as an unwanted horse and then I find (through these same EWA folk) that there is..........

Excerpt from Article, "Sensible debate over unwanted horses would help anti-slaughter lobby" by John Holland, Gail Vacca ( a breeder of race horses) and other anti horse-slaughter "advocates."

Are any horses "unwanted"?

"..Yes, and this is where I depart from the conventional wisdom of some of the anti-slaughter community. There are horses that are old, infirm, dangerous or an insurance and economic liability and simply need to have their lives ended..."

(by slaughter?!)

Full Article;

So there you have it, from "our anti horse-slaughter leaders," guess they dont really want to see it end. According to what they are saying here, slaughter is a necessary thing! There are "unwanted" horses whos lives "need" to be ended in this way!

(by slaughter?!!)

Anti-Horse Slaughter Advocates Poo-Hoo Idea of Boycott

It is said that those who think they are doing enough will not do more. I think in this case it is true. Why are not the "Mother Orgs" who claim to be dedicated to the goal of passing our Federal bill NOT supporting The International Boycott of "All Things" Pro Horse-Slaughter and/or encouraging others to do so,...until HR 503 is passed?

Could it be cause it wasnt their idea? (a lil' bit o' Pettiness and/or jealously perhaps? It wouldnt be the first case of it in the anti horse-slaughter / rescue camp!) Or do they like eating meat or going to the racetrack or rodeos and/or breeding so much that they know they could never give such things up,..not even just for awhile,..for the horses sake,.. until we pass our bill? I just fail to understand.

Why wouldnt the "Mother Orgs" (our leaders) want to do everything possible to see an end to American Horse Slaughter? They equate the anti horse-slaughter movement to a war,...that must be attacked on "many fronts" ---which of course is true BUT you must have a main line of defense....(or offense, as the case may be) you must have a continuous FRONTLINE battle against the main forces opposing us, so WHY wouldnt they support an International Boycott of "all things" pro horse-slaughter while the little "side-battles" go on and on? I just dont understand why they wouldnt want to utilize EVERY weapon available to us in the battle to see it end, can you? Why are they holding back their "big guns" which is the power they have (if united) to boycott "all things" pro horseslaughter on a grand scale, to hit the enemy (the meat and horse-racing and breeding industries and all that support them) hard where it hurts?

Well here is the latest blurb from EWA telling of all the good that they have done, but still have yet to end horse slaughter (every five minutes, remember, an American Horse is Slaughtered, and if we dont pass HR 503 soon, our American Mustangs will go there too;) Time IS of the essence I say...what are we waiting for? Boycott "Everything" pro horse-slaughter NOW and put a quick end to it all with a UNIFIED show of power. Nothing less will do.

From Equine Welfare Alliance

The question was asked about how we at EWA feel about our progress against horse slaughter this year.

Please understand that we regard this whole process as an analogy to war. It is not fought on a single front or with a single strategy and there are many operations that we cannot talk about without giving away our advantage. Sometimes we can divulge things later, and sometimes not at all. For example, you probably now know that we worked hard to get the town of Harding access to the pollution and sewer records from Cavel, Dallas Crown and NVF. We did not go to them and say "please don't build a plant that kills our beautiful horses." We showed them that a plant would be bad for the community and we also showed them that there was no pot of gold.

So federal legislation is only one battlefield. The bad guys have high paid strategists and last year they unveiled their strategy. It was to use the heavily agricultural state legislatures to push for horse slaughter legislation. They knew these state laws could not in themselves allow them to bring back slaughter, but the idea was to make it look like a backlash was growing in the country's ag belt. In politics, momentum is everything. Since they too kept their plans secret until the last moment, they had early successes. Almost all military attacks that are kept secret have early success, and this was no difference. We had no defenses or plans to stop them.

But the bad guys squandered their advantage with truly stooopid laws like Ed Butcher's in Montana. And in every state where laws were introduced last year, horse friendly people quickly began coming together to fight them. This year was a total and complete zero for the pro-slaughter legislation. More over, Sue Wallis has begun to wear thin on her own state residents.

There are many aspects, as I have said. We continue to push the federal legislation, but please recognize that it does not even need to pass to be important. As long as a federal ban is a real possibility, no businessman in his right mind is going to build a horse slaughter plant in the US. All this talk out of Wyoming and Montana is just that, and the press is beginning to realize it.

After Butcher got his bill passed in Montana, he began bragging to the press that he was going to bring a wonderful horse slaughter plant to the town of Hardin and that he was talking to investors with Chinese business contacts. He had originally said last year that he was talking to the "Belgians". So his change of nation told us that Velda has decided this is not a good place to put a plant.

Anyhow, it was devastating for Butcher to go to all that trouble only to be told by the community he was "trying to help" that they wanted no part of it. This is all his own doing since he never really looked at the history of these plants and what they do to communities. He just blew it all off as "two bit hippies". Moreover, his bill protecting horse slaughter plants from law suites was based on his misunderstanding of what had closed the US plants. None was closed by law suites over environmental concerns (although they should have been). The reporter that covered Butcher's bragging was shocked to get our release saying the town had blocked the plant over a month earlier.

We did the same kind of work when some Canadian politicians tried to get the First Nation tribe of Carry the Kettle to take over and restart the slaughter plant at Natural Valley. We got them the finances of the previous plant showing them it was a disaster and we showed them the environmental mess that they would be responsible for. The old Chief who wanted the plant lost his vote and then the next election. The man opposing him on the issue is now Chief.

We have taken the same approach with the Europeans. We don't tell them that they shouldn't eat our horses because we love horses, instead we worked on exposing the health risks involved in horse meat.

Do I feel good about this year? Darn right I do, but do I feel comfortable? No. We must watch and be ready for new moves and ploys and we must all have our noses in the wind. We are all wondering what will happen after July when the new EU regulations kick in.

Still, the work of all the groups from AC4H to AAHA, CHDC and many others has been absolutely marvelous.

If you want to take the fight against horse slaughter father than you have ever have before, if you believe in the power of well-organized, UNIFIED, sustained boycotts, join up and be counted here, in the Friends of Equines International Boycott Campaign; We will show "our leaders" how to do it, and once it takes off, maybe they will join US then, when they see how effective it is; It is THE ONLY way to pass our bill. (Remember we have been trying "politely" for over ten (10) years! - Dont you think its time to get SERIOUS for a change and make some real sacrifices of our own to do it? )

Imagine if all the anti horse-slaughter groups (in the link below) could "come together" and support an International Boycott of "all things" pro horse-slaughter,....dont you think UNITED we could get the job done, in a hurry?

Friends of Equines FOES of Equine Slaughter Yahoo Group;


Shelley in Canada said...

The article about a sensible debate is by Alex Brown, not John Holland. Both are anti-slaughter - neither has ever mentioned that horses should be slaughtered for any reason. What Alex was saying was that some horses should be euthanized.
I do agree that ALL horse protection advocates should band together, but sadly that isn't the case.

Laura said...

Hey, John Holland is as staunch an anti-slaughter advocate as there is. He has worked very hard this year to help defeat these state pro-slaughter bills and was instrumental in developing and making public the idea horsemeat from American horses is dangerous. Surely, stamping out demand is integral to the effort to end slaughter.

I would ask that this blog take down the survey about whether horse slaughter is necessary. Of course, it's not! Why pretend there's a legitimate argument in support of it? I would ask instead that you direct people to this letter writing campaign urging Congress to pass HR 503/SB 727. If we get a million letters, I have to believe they will pay attention!

Laura said...

The link was cut off in prior comment. Here it is! Send letters NOW to Congress in support of HR 503! Let's show them we all support this bill.

Mz.Many Names said...

Shelly, I never saw Alex's name as an author on this article , but I did see at the end "Caroline Betts, John Holland, Kerry O'Niel and Gail Vacca" as contributors. Nevertheless, the first point of contention I have with this article is their assertion that there IS such a thing as unwanted horses that "need to be killed!" I believe there is no such thing as an unwanted horse, only owners who dont want their horses! Another point of contention I have with this article is the assertion that "a horse would need to be killed for certain reasons, citing such examples as "economics,"..."insurance," or, if a horse is mean or "dangerous." In my mind there is only one reason any animals life should be ended and it is none of the above. An animal should be humanely put down for one reason and one reason alone,...and that is only in cases to relieve endless hopeless suffering where there is no hope of recovery or quality of life." Why would you want to kill a horse for anyother reason? Why would you want to kill a horse if it wasent suffering andit wasent his time, and there are other safe and viable options (yes, even for the so-called "dangerous" ones?) Economics? INSURANCE?!! I shudda known there was a racing mans hand in this. If there is anything that I have learned from all my years at the tracks, it is this: "There is only one sure thing at the track and that is a tax write off for the owner on a dead horse. Bet it pays more than slaughter too. No wonder they are so quick to put racehorses down at the least little injury,...either that, or they are shipped off lame to slaughter. Either way, the owners get paid. But the issue of horse slaughter is NOT about whats best for the owners, and I think people tend to lose track of that fact. It not about whats best or more convieient or profitable for us, but rather, its about whats is best and least traumatic for the horse. Nuff said,k'? Over-n-Out

Mz.Many Names said...

Laura, the purpose of the poll is to show the pro-slaughters as well as others new to the issue that polls consistantly show most people are against horse slaughter, and they do consistantly show that, and I fail to understand how you could think that a bad thing for the cause.Polls in our favor are valuable tools in our educational and legislative campaigns, dont you think? And Ive asked it before and I;ll ask it again, why wouldnt you want to use every tool available to us in combating the pro-slaughters propaganda campaigns? I still write letters as I have been for years and even though I feel it dont do much good (as time has proven) but still, as I said above, I believe in using every tool and writing to our legislatiors is one of them that I continue to use.....for all the good it will do (NOT). But I keep on writing anyways cause it is an important part of my being to always strive to practice what I preach.
In Solidarity for the Cause
Peace-Out My Friend