Friday, April 22, 2011

NEW VIDEO HAMMERS U.S. HUMANE SOCIETY: Columbia animal doc leads charge

Prop B opponent Alan Wessler reappears in HSUS opposition push
COLUMBIA, 4/22/11  (Beat Byte) --  A Missouri farmers group and a Columbia veterinarian have launched a viral new YouTube video that decries the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) as a "radical animal rights lobby."

Sponsored by Missouri Farmers Care and Alan Wessler, DVM,  "HSUS Revealed!" has already netted nearly 35,000 viewings since it was posted March 25.  

"This video provides a great snapshot into HSUS' true intentions by revealing significant cracks in the image the organization chooses to portray," Wessler told Bovine Veterinarian Magazine (BVM) April 12.  With urgent music, the video claims HSUS provides no help to animal shelters, instead spending $121 million in 2009 in salaries, promotions, lobbying, and "attacking agriculture throughout the United States."

Specifically, HSUS has sponsored legislation that harms hog farmers, dairies, and ranchers, all in an effort to drive down meat consumption and the animals it kills, the video maintains.  It also condemns Missouri's Prop B puppy mill initiative, which Wessler publicly opposed

"We are at a point where livestock and companion raisers must tell their story -- how they care for their animals, how that compassion comes through as evidenced by the extra efforts they put forth in the dead of winter, the heat of summer, etc. -- before the story told by animal rights groups takes center stage in the public's mind," Wessler told BVM. 

HSUS Revealed!


  1. There is also another component to this besides the animal rights nut cases, which is just a draw to indoctrinate young people. That is the sustainability and food equity crowd. Yes, we have one such group here in Columbia composed of well to do liberals attached to MU. They use trendy lefty catch phrases such as "sustainability" and "food equity" to propagandize those who can't think critically for themselves. Their basic premise is Marxist overall. Basically it runs like this. Much of Americas surplus grain production goes into animal feed to support Americans meat "addiction." That surplus grain should go to Africa and other third world countries in order to have "equity." (free of course, on the backs of the producers I suppose) In other words, if the individual in Bengladesh doesn't get to eat steak then you don't either! Of course the rules should apply to everyone else and not them as they consider themselves the ruling elite. Al Gore ring a bell?

  2. I am guessing that to most I would fit into the profile of the sustainability and food equity crowd provided in the previous comment. Unfortunately, things are seldom that straightforwardly simple. The acknowledgment of problems associated with commodity production does not a Marxist make. Although I have my own set of criticisms of superficial sustainability efforts and campaigns that present the consumption of privileged foods as the primary method for achieving justice or equity, I think that it is not correct to confuse the tactics employed by the Human Society with those employed by the interests of corporate and industrial agriculture here. I have not been following this debate closely, but from the little bit of propaganda that I have seen from both sides, I feel safe in assuming that most parties involved in this discussion, especially following the results of Proposition B, are either telling lies or at least attempting to omit relevant information. We can have culturally and environmentally appropriate production of healthy diets that does not involve the contamination of fresh water by the waste from septic system failures at industrial meat plants. Dismissing legitimate concerns about quality of life by attempting to invoke fear with an image of an inferior diet does nothing to address the concerns of the humane society, farmers, or those not impressed with efforts guided by a superficial interpretation of sustainability and food equity.

  3. Justin, I am the oringinal poster. I have issues with companies like Tyson, Monsanto, CAFO's and Industrial type farming. Mostly with wealthy individuals who never step foot on a farm and buying up huge tracks of land and "farming" it. Only because they want to stick their snouts in the subsidy trough and exploit agricultural tax breaks. I have a major problem also with many in the sustainability crowd who are determined to ram their agenda down everyone elses throat. Are you one of them? I don't know. There is an enormous amount of evidence of leftist groups trying to do this. But I did notice the term "privileged foods." Yes, it is a privilege to live in this country and enjoy what it has to offer and we are going to protect that. We live in a free country (supposedly) and you are free to be as sustainable and equitable as you choose. However leave us to our "privileged" foods and backyard BBQ's with steaks, ribs, bacon cheeseburgers and chicken. Questions? People should Google -Now They Are Coming for Our Food and Water- from Interesting.