Subject: Fla Gamefowl News

            Since I am one of the few that testified in the Senate Agriculture Committee and have been working on the stoppage of this bill since January, maybe I can clarify a couple of things up about the rumor’s that hit the airways shortly after the Senate bill was passed.

 

The first item that came out was:

  1. We all had two weeks to get rid of our birds
  2. We could not have a dubbed rooster or a tie cord.

No where in this bill does it resemble or make such a statement.  These two items are rumors.  Let us not forget the amendment that was placed on the bill; “Notwithstanding any provision of this subsection to the contrary, possession of the animal alone does not constitute a violation of this section.”  Meaning: Nobody can show up and take your fowl without the proven fact's that you only breed them to fight.  I hope this clears up some of the rumors.

 

            What I’m about to say may strike a nerve with some people, but it is reality.  I have danced with the devil on a pale moon night. The politicians have forewarned us that if we keep pushing the cockfighting issue we are going to lose.

 

            In closing, I have but this to say; the people that supported the cockfighting issue you got what the politicians warned you about.  Those that chose political corrective efforts I am sorry that we became victims of circumstance.  Florida has no choice now; we must choose the proper leadership.

 

Sincerely,

Verbon

 


 
ARA lies and misinformation.

For long now, the HSUS and PETA, have made great attempts to slander and misuse words against cockfighters, gamefowl breeders, fisherman, and hunters alike. Concerning gamefowl, they want to take these birds away from us, and they want to kill them themselves. Now I don't see that as humane. In fact I believe that each animal that they take possession of should have to be fed and cared for without possibility of being put down, or murdered as I see it. They should have to take ownership as any reader would, and keep strict records on how they are treated medically. At the time of a animals death they should have to get an  autopsy done on the animal from a Independent Organization, so as they cant be put to death before their time. If there was not so much profit from the fight they are fighting, I just don't think they would be in the business. If they truly cared for animals, they wouldn't be killing them every day of every year. I have noticed as of late, it is the ARA's (Animal Rights Advocates) that have been guilty of desecration of personal property of others. They have firebombed  College Halls, and Poultry Facilities. This raises Insurance costs for everyone, and cost the tax payers a lot of money. They are on the F.B.I's Civil Terrorist list, not cockfighters. It is time for the people and lawmakers of this country who are so proud of their freedom, to stop being bullied by this form of socialism these people are pushing, like drug dealers are pushing crack on the streets. There is nothing human about animals, and when you take a humans  rights from him, that is what is truly inhumane. They want us to stop eating meat, but yet I think they will never get a Lion to understand their line of reasoning. They get the money from people in most cases, that just think it is a good cause, but in actuality, they are killing more animals than just Gamecocks. They kill dogs, cats , mice, rats, any and every animal they confiscate. They should have to care for them, but we the people offer them a cheaper way to deal with them, so they can spend their money to take yet more of our rights. I ask, What is a free man, if there is no land of the free to be in? He is nothing, and they see us as nothing, and they intend to take everything. They wont stop here, next it will be the poultry companies, they have shown signs of this already. The poultry companies wont stand beside the cockfighters, as they would rather blame them for diseases that are clearly not their fault, as each of our birds receive more personal care than theirs ever will. They say the END virus made its way to the US from roosters imported from Mexico, and it is a lie, long have people known that we don't buy chickens from Mexico. We export them to Mexico, as not only is our fowl better and more disease resistant. They are also better maintained. Millions of tax dollars will be lost , thousands upon thousands of farmers, feed mills, and families, yes families, will lose Multi Millions of dollars if the laws they represent are passed. There are people feeding their families , based solely on their sales of Gamefowl to other countries, people put through college by the same means. HSUS and PETA are takers not givers, they will take and take till there is nothing left. Where as Gamefowl fanciers and cockfighters, give and give till there is nothing left, we give for feed, and supplies, antibiotics, wood for pens, wire fencing, and even to the US postal service and Fed-EX, and UPS, when we ship our fowl.They think we make big money fighting our stock, and it just isn't so, in fact almost every cockfighter can show loss of income every year. Why do they do it?The love for the spirit of their Gamefowl. These people will have you believe that they are trained to fight, and it is a lie. They fight naturally at around the age of 6 to 10 months. In the jungle, a clutch is hatched off. The mother and father look after them the best that they can, all the while they know that when these came of age, they are going to battle for the spot as the family leader. This is the way they decide who carries on their family bloodline. They are not taught or trained to do this, they do it on instinct.Yet I saw an article from New York, the ARA people their commented that they would be "euthanized", because once trained in this manner there was no possibility for rehabilitation, and I laughed, at the ignorance of these people who are trying to "protect" them. It was so clear to me that
how little they knew about them,you cant rehabilitate natural order.

Rights they are encroaching.

The Federal Statute Title 18, U.S.C., Section 241 States...........
Conspiracy Against Rights - This statute makes it unlawful for two or more persons to conspire to
injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person of any state, territory or district in the free exercise
or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him/her by the Constitution or the laws of the United
States, (or because of his/her having exercised the same)..............

They are taking our rights, and later they will take the rights of those who wont stand up for ours.

Kevin (hotcocker) Haynes
Member:The asba
www.theasba.com


 
AR Promoting Cannibalism On A Major Network?
 
Shouldn't There Be A Law Against That?
 
<snip>
 
PRESS: OK, Lieutenant Colonel, thank you so much for joining us, Rick Francona, new information on Iraq. Appreciate it very much.
       And when we come back, folks: There’s another war going on. Yes, PETA. PETA has declared war on KFC. What can we do to save our chickens and save our alligators at the same time?
       PETA’s president, Ingrid Newkirk, joins us next on BUCHANAN & PRESS.
       (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
       PRESS: Welcome back to BUCHANAN & PRESS.
       Before we get to our next guest, we want to bring you this bulletin we were just handed: that a federal court here in Washington has rejected part of the ban on soft money contained in the campaign finance law-that’s the McCain-Feingold legislation passed last year by the Congress-saying it is unconstitutional.
       BUCHANAN: I’ll bet that’s the part we objected to, Bill, which is the organizations, the cause people, you can’t tell them they can’t run ads on causes right up until Election Day, the 60-day thing. I’ll bet that’s what it is. But this is going to be big news.
       PRESS: We do not know what it is.
       BUCHANAN: We don’t know, but I’ll bet you.
       PRESS: We want to make that clear. All we know, it is part of the McCain-Feingold legislation that has been declared unconstitutional.
       BUCHANAN: We’ll be on top of it.
       PRESS: As we get more details, we’ll bring it to you.
       But, as we told you, KFC is under fire from PETA, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. They say that their chicken farms, the way these chickens are raised represent cruel and unusual punishment.
       Joining us right now to tell us about it is Ingrid Newkirk. She joins us from rMDNM_Norfolk. And, of course, she’s the founder and president of PETA.
       Ingrid, good to have you back on the show.
       Let me ask you first, before we get to the chickens, let’s go to our beleaguered alligators, this just shocking video this week that we saw down in Texas, where a big huge alligator crawled up into a residential neighborhood. They called authorities. And they tied this alligator to the back of a pickup truck, dragged it down the street, and then shot it.
       Ingrid, this was the Fish and Wildlife officer that did this. Aren’t they trained to treat these animals better?
       INGRID NEWKIRK, PRESIDENT & FOUNDER, PETA: Well, they don’t have a very good reputation across the country. There’s a joke-and it’s not much of a joke-but that they would shoot their own mother if she was on all fours. A lot of them are sort of wanna-be rodeo cowboys.
       And I think that they don’t look at the most humane means of removing wildlife when the wildlife is not cute and cuddly. They think they can get away with pretending an alligator is a trailer and hooking him to the back of their truck. And they can’t. It’s time they changed.
       BUCHANAN: Ingrid, my understanding is, though, that, even though this was-I agree with you-just-this is gratuitous cruelty. They should have-if they had to dispatch of the animal, they should have shot it right there. But I understand that there’s no real offense that they have committed and this was sort of a-almost a practice, was it not?
       NEWKIRK: It seems that some animals are exempt from the cruelty statute, for no good reason, because, obviously, all wildlife feels pain and there are proper ways or improper ways of disposing of or dealing with wildlife.
       BUCHANAN: All right, let me take you now-if we can take up the Kentucky Fried Chicken. I understand Jason Alexander is a spokesman for Kentucky Fried Chicken. I guess they call it KFC.
       And while I haven’t seen the chicken farms, I’ve certainly seen some of these hog confinements, which are very similar. They have no opportunity to move. And it looks like it’s cruel. Have you been able to make any progress?
       NEWKIRK: I met with Jason Alexander on Tuesday. He seems to be a very conscientious person. And I think it’s sort of like Kathie Lee Gifford and the sweatshops. He got into it not knowing.
       I told him about the way in which, because they don’t have mechanized handling, the workers just slam the chickens into the sides of the crates, breaking their wings. And KFC, which we call KFC cruelty-we have a Web site, KFCCruelty.com-they give these animals so many drugs that their bones in their legs actually splinter because they can’t support their body weight. I’m hoping that he will be able to influence the company. He was certainly very upset about it and he did go right to KFC and complain.
       PRESS: Well, first of all, what control does KFC have over these chicken farms? I mean, they sell the chicken, but somebody else raises the chicken and sells it to KFC, right? So aren’t you going after the wrong party here?
       NEWKIRK: No. They have every control in the world, because they hold the purse strings. And they can actually do what McDonald’s, Wendy’s, Burger King, other places have done. And that’s say: We want changes. We want reforms. We won’t buy from these suppliers. We won’t contract with these slaughter houses, unless they stop the worst abuses.
       And we have a list of eight of them that we’re asking them to enact.
       BUCHANAN: Ingrid, there’s reports that you’ve made out a last will and testament, whereby you’re going to give your feet to be used as an umbrella stand? You want to comment on that for us?
       NEWKIRK: Well, Pat, I’m not hoping to go anywhere yet.
       (LAUGHTER)
       NEWKIRK: I’ll be around to plague you for a long time.
       BUCHANAN: But they’re use your flesh for barbecue? Now, what is this all about?
       NEWKIRK: Well, I think, when I die, animal cruelty isn’t going to have stopped. And I don’t want to stop campaigning against it.
       So I decided, maybe I’ll put my body to use. So I’ve donated some to PETA to barbecue when I’m gone. And if people smell that flesh cooking and they think, yum, it might cause them to come up short if they think, oh, lord, it could be her. I also want some of my skin tanned and made into leather so that-to make the point, like the umbrella stand feet, that you don’t have to hurt or kill or use flesh or skin for amusements, for food or for clothing or for anything else anymore. It’s the 21st century.
       (CROSSTALK)
       BUCHANAN: OK, Ingrid, we hope you’ll stick around for a little while, Ingrid, before you carry out this little plan of yours.
       NEWKIRK: You, too, Pat. Thank you.
       PRESS: Thanks, Ingrid. Thank you.
 
<snip>

Source: http://www.msnbc.com/news/909493.asp?cp1=1
 

 
........"At the end of the day, what PETA is fighting for is kindness.".........
 
........Kerr argued that a contribution to Earth Liberation Front does not mean that PETA supports violence..........
 
Has The News Media Simply Become A Tool For Political Propaganda?
AR Claim Gamefowl Breeders Are Cockfighters But A Contribution To Domestic Terrorists Doesn't Show A Support Of Violence?
 
 
 
PETA critics claim it supports violence
 
By EMILY GERSEMA
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON -- They have protested the fur trade and leather by standing topless near the White House, and called attention to their claims of animal abuse in circuses by sitting on the sidewalk, half-naked and painted like tigers in wire cages.

Members of the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals have a history of using often outrageous, sometimes offensive tactics to draw attention to animal rights. Their campaigns urge the public to boycott products made from animals, from fur coats to fried chicken.

PETA protesters put on peaceful demonstrations to gather public support for improvements in animal treatment, but critics are skeptical of its financial backing of other animal welfare organizations, arguing that some donations show it endorses violence.

"Based on the evidence ... they support terrorism financially," said John Doyle, spokesman for the Center for Consumer Freedom, which represents restaurants and food manufacturers.

Doyle cites a $1,500 contribution PETA made in April 2001 to the North American Earth Liberation Front, a violent activist group that has taken credit for setting fire to buildings and businesses. Most recently, it claimed responsibility for burning Ford vehicles at a dealership in Pennsylvania.

The FBI lists the group and its counterpart, the Animal Liberation Front, as domestic terrorists. The government has said the two are responsible for more than 600 cases of ecoterrorism around the country, such as spray-painting buildings, breaking windows, and burning fur farms and laboratories.

PETA, which gathered $13 million in contributions through direct donations and fund-raisers in the 2000 tax year, said on the tax return that it donated a small amount of money to the Earth Liberation Front "to support their program activities."

In all, PETA donated $206,655 to other animal welfare activists and individuals operating animal shelters.

Jeff Kerr, an attorney for PETA, said the organization regularly chips in to support other animal rights efforts.

"PETA tries to help organizations around the world that are doing good animal work," he said. "There are some people who are doing animal protection work on their own. The money is given to help support whatever animal work they're doing."

Kerr argued that a contribution to Earth Liberation Front does not mean that PETA supports violence.

"PETA doesn't condemn or endorse what they do because it's not PETA," he said. "That's like saying everybody who contributed money to the Republican Party in 1972 supported Watergate."

The organization has not sent any more checks to Earth Liberation Front since April 2001.

Among the PETA critics are food and farm industry groups that have been targeted by PETA activists protesting how they raise and slaughter animals. Last month, PETA started a campaign to get Kentucky Fried Chicken to make its suppliers change how they slaughter chickens. PETA is demanding processors use gas to kill birds, rather than shocks of electricity.

While animal rights groups claim PETA is effective in improving animal rights by putting pressure on businesses, industry groups disagree.

Richard Lobb, a spokesman for the National Chicken Council, said chicken growers and other meat producers are developing animal welfare standards, but not because of PETA's pressure.

Rather, it is because consumers are seeking such changes.

"I think there is a social concern" for animal welfare, Lobb said. "We're just refining standards that already are in use."

Bruce G. Friedrich, a spokesman for PETA, said that the organization always carries out its complaints in a legal fashion.

"They're good at coming up with the best smear tactics that (public relations) firms can devise," he said of critics. "At the end of the day, what PETA is fighting for is kindness."

Source: http://www.modbee.com/business/story/6665620p-7606693c.html

 

 
A Different Kind Of Kindness We Are All Accustomed To?

Enviro-Terror in Disguise

By BRENDAN STEINHAUSER

As the United States prepares itself for the post 9-11 world, it must fight the threat of domestic terrorism as well as terrorism abroad.

For most people, Osama bin Laden's network, Al Qaeda, tops the list of the most serious threats to our security, and for good reason. But there are also many homegrown terrorist groups at work within America.

One of these domestic terrorist networks is a fringe of the animal rights movement. These otherwise apparently docile organizations have advocated and engaged in violent acts of terror, and will continue to do so until recognized for what they are.

One FBI agent has testified before the U.S. Congress that, "actions by special interest extremists, including animal rights groups, is the most dangerous threat to the country." These animal rights groups, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals and the Earth Liberation Front, participate in violent behavior that cannot be characterized as anything other than terrorism.

Bruce Friedrich, the campaign director of PETA, has remarked, "Of course we are going to be blowing stuff up and smashing windows. I think it is a great way to bring about animal liberation." At a PETA convention he proclaimed that "it would be a great thing if all of these fast-food outlets, these slaughterhouses, these laboratories, and the banks that fund them exploded tomorrow-hallelujah to the people who are willing to do it."

In discussing the foot and mouth disease scare of a few months ago, Friedrich said that an outbreak would be good for his cause, and then hinted darkly that he might try to import the disease. The seriousness of his comments has convinced Wisconsin congressman Mark Green that the USDA should "decontaminate him" when he returns to the United States from trips to other countries.

All these statements are a direct encouragement to activists to cause large-scale damage in the name of "liberating animals." Friedrich has made it clear that his group intends to break the law, putting lives at risk in order to achieve its goals. He and his cronies are a direct threat to the security of American institutions.

Likewise, the FBI has described the Earth Liberation Front as "the largest and most active U.S.-based terrorist group." The bureau has reported that this particular environmentalist terror organization has caused more than forty-three million dollars in damage since 1996. PETA in turn has contributed thousands of dollars to the ELF in order to "support their program activities."

Recent 'program activities' of the group have included such conduct as firebombing the Vail Ski Resort four years ago, and setting fire to a Michigan State University research facility. The total property damage in just these two "activities" alone was over twelve million dollars. Fortunately, there was no loss of human life.

In Austin, at the University of Texas, there is a registered student group called Students Against Cruelty to Animals. This group holds rallies a few times a year on the west mall and preaches the creed of protecting animal rights. When asked whether any members of the group are in any way affiliated with PETA or the ELF, they respond that some of their members have participated in events with these groups. But they claim that they do not, as a group, endorse these other organizations.

But one can assume from those statements that at least some of the members of SACA that attend UT have been involved in events organized by either PETA or the ELF. The next time you walk by a rally sponsored by this organization, remember what some of these people have been involved in. If you think that by donating money to one of these groups you are fighting for animal rights, think again. You just may be giving money to people that want to blow up banks or destroy important and valuable research facilities. Your contribution may mean that you, however unwillingly or unknowingly, are supporting domestic terrorist activities.

Intentional terroristic acts of vandalism, arson, intimidation and assault must not go unpunished.

No free and democratic nation can tolerate terrorism, no matter what the goals of the terror group may be, if it is to remain free. Groups seeking to achieve change in the system must go through the same democratic process as all other special interest groups. Those groups that engage in terrorism to achieve their ends must be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

Terror has many faces, all of them evil and ugly. They must all be dealt with in the same way.

The fate of our nation rests on its ability to secure for its citizens the freedom to pursue their dreams without the threat of violence and fear. Americans must protect their freedom by actively supporting those that promote the rule of law and order, and by opposing those that use violence and terror as a means to their end.

Source: http://www.austinreview.com/articles/2003_04/terror.htm


 
Remember Joshua Caleb Harper, One Of The 29 Adults Arrested And Taken To The Yolo County Jail in April 1997 Along With John Paul Goodwin.
John Paul Goodwin, Oh My, Isn't He Now The HSUS Conflict Industrialist?
 

Federal raid near UW targets animal-rights activists
Animal Liberation Front part of nationwide inquiry

By PAUL SHUKOVSKY
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER

A raid last week by the FBI domestic terrorism squad on a house on the University of Washington's fraternity row is part of a nationwide investigation into crimes committed in the name of animal rights.

Agents hauled away computer hard drives, fliers from the underground Animal Liberation Front, mail and phone lists from the sparsely furnished, student-style home, federal criminal justice officials said.

One of the residents of the home is Josh Harper, a 28-year-old vegan and self-avowed anarchist. He has been working for years to free animals from what he sees as the tyranny of exploitation and abuse by people who eat them or use them for research.

  Josh Harper, a Seattle animal rights activist
  Zoom P-I file
  Activist Josh Harper argues that use of animals for research is supremely evil and must be stopped.

Among the researchers he disdains the most is Huntingdon Life Sciences, a company with labs in New Jersey and Europe that tests pharmaceuticals on animals. The holy grail for an animal rights group called Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty is to cause the collapse of the company.

Toward that end, animal rights activists have targeted anyone associated with the company, including a Kirkland resident who recently retired as a Huntingdon director. The man received threatening phone calls. And other companies with whom he was associated were the target of demonstrations and threatening communications, according to an FBI affidavit and anonymous news releases distributed on behalf of animal rights activists.

Activists went so far as to send threatening communications to the Alliance for Education, a not-for-profit organization dedicated to Seattle Public Schools, because the Kirkland man served on its board.

Since the man ended his association with Huntingdon, "he is not a target anymore," said a federal criminal justice source.

But Huntingdon remains in the cross hairs of the animal rights group that was formed to battle it. The same day that the FBI searched the house on fraternity row, agents raided the headquarters of Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty in New Jersey and seized computers there.

In a statement on the organization's Web site, it declares that "rather than being derailed, we are driven by even more injustice against which to fight. Not only are the animals at HLS (Huntingdon) under attack, but our own activists. It's time to pull together even more than before, resist this criminalization of dissent, and finish the hellhole that is HLS off for good."

The tactics used against Huntingdon include:

Harper could not be reached for comment yesterday. Federal criminal justices sources said he is on his way back from the United Kingdom where he was meeting with colleagues in the animal-rights movement.

Harper told the Seattle Post-Intelligencer two years ago that he sees "hope in every broken window, every torched police car and every mink running free as their hearts desire."

He has tossed a lighted flare and smoke canister at Native American whalers, charged through a police line outside a conference of biomedical researchers and participated in dozens of demonstrations against the fur industry, factory farms and slaughterhouses.

And Harper, who once suffered from testicular cancer, said he would rather die than take a drug tested on animals. From his perspective, Huntingdon's use of animals for research is supremely evil and must be stopped.

The actions of activists have hurt Huntingdon. The company found itself without an auditor in March when Deloitte & Touche cut its ties to Huntingdon because of being the target of activists.

Michael Caulfield, general manager of Huntingdon's American operations, said yesterday that Deloitte & Touche pulled out "based on the pressure they were subjected to. There have been a number of financial backers who, for the very same reason, have elected to end their relationship with Huntingdon for fear of the safety of their staff.

"Their intention is clearly to extort people out of any relationship with our business."

But Caulfield says Huntingdon remains one of the largest independent drug-testing companies in the world with annual revenue of more than $100 million.

Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty says that revenue is earned from the torture of research animals. It's a charge that Caulfield categorically rejects.

"We are a USDA (Department of Agriculture) registered research facility that is inspected regularly by the federal government." And he says that Huntingdon goes "over and above federal standards for animal care and welfare" by seeking independent accreditation.

Calls to the group formed to stop Huntingdon were not returned.

So far, no arrest warrant has been issued as a result of the raids. But a Seattle area man is in the state prison in Shelton in a related case.

In October, Nathan Brasfield was found kneeling on the ground outside a closed building in Tukwila. He was wearing a black jumpsuit and black cap and was holding a laptop computer from which wires ran to a telephone junction box on the building. When authorities searched the laptop, they found files referring to Huntingdon and the Kirkland man that contained phrases like "puppy killer," and "animal torturing," according to an FBI affidavit.

An associate found with Brasfield told police that she and the 24-year-old Brasfield were sending a "black fax" to a company associated with the Kirkland man that contained a message urging it to drop the man. When police contacted the company, the business turned over 15 faxes that said the Kirkland man must go and urged "dump the puppy killer."

Brasfield has been behind bars since his arrest and is serving a one-year sentence for theft of telecommunications property and possession of stolen property.

P-I reporter Paul Shukovsky can be reached at 206-448-8072 or paulshukovsky@seattlepi.com

Source: http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/120226_alf02.html

Courtesy: Marc R.


 
.........Comparing hate crimes to terrorism, Kennedy said in prepared remarks Thursday that hate crimes "are a violation of everything our country stands for. Like all acts of terrorism, they have an impact far greater than that suffered by the individual victims and their families.".........
Is There A Double Standard? One For Liberals And Then One For Animal Care And Use Individuals?
 
 
Kennedy, Liberal Republicans Urge Protection for Homosexuals
By Lawrence Morahan
CNSNews.com Senior Staff Writer
May 05, 2003

(CNSNews.com) - With the support of liberal Republicans, Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) has reintroduced legislation that would expand federal hate crime laws to include crimes motivated by a victim's "sexual orientation."

Co-sponsored by Republican Sens. Arlen Specter (Pa.) and Gordon Smith (Ore.), Kennedy's bill would add the new classification to existing laws that target violence because of race and religion, in effect granting special protection to homosexuals as a class of people.

The bill, titled the Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act of 2003, also would increase federal jurisdiction in hate crimes, allowing the Justice Department to investigate crimes against homosexuals even if local authorities found no reason to prosecute them, legal analysts said.

Comparing hate crimes to terrorism, Kennedy said in prepared remarks Thursday that hate crimes "are a violation of everything our country stands for. Like all acts of terrorism, they have an impact far greater than that suffered by the individual victims and their families."

Arabs and Muslims also have been increasingly targets of hate crimes since 9/11, particularly in Los Angeles and Chicago. In all, law enforcement officials registered 9,730 hate crimes in the United States in 2001, Kennedy said, citing FBI figures.

Sponsors of the bill said they had the support of 175 law enforcement and religious groups.

In previous years, Kennedy succeeded in passing two similar hate crime bills in the Senate; the legislation did not pass in the House, however.

The new legislation would strengthen the ability of federal, state and local governments to investigate and prosecute hate crimes based on race, ethnic background, religion, gender, sexual orientation and disability.

It would also enable the Justice Department to assist state and local agencies in the investigation and prosecution of hate crimes, as well as provide grants to help state and local governments meet the expenses involved in hate crime cases.

Hate crime laws, which are on the books in 42 states and the District of Columbia, vary in their application and effect but generally provide for increased fines and jail terms if it can be proven a crime was motivated by racial, ethnic or gender-based hatred.

Twenty-one states with hate crime laws include legislation against acts of violence based on "sexual orientation."

Opponents of hate crime legislation say existing laws already cover the new statutes and that are basically unenforceable.

"Hate crime laws violate the constitutional provision of equal protection of the laws," said Michael Schwartz, vice president of government relations with Concerned Women for America.

"They force prosecutors to inquire into the motivations of criminals, and the essence of criminal law in the Anglo-American tradition has been the determination of external acts, not internal dispositions," he said.

Once prosecutors start to psychoanalyze people and criminalize what they think and how they feel, "then we are crossing a very, very dangerous line," Schwartz said.

The U.S. legal tradition is clear about the sharp definitions that distinguish between lawful activities and unlawful activities, and those definitions can be made only with respect to overt acts, Schwartz said.

"An overt act is either criminal or it's not criminal. Its criminality cannot depend on the state of mind of the perpetrator or the category of identity of the victim," he said.

Andrea Lafferty, executive director of Traditional Values Coalition, said the measure would silence people of faith who wanted to speak publicly on moral issues.

"The purpose of this legislation is really to use federal law to force Americans to accept homosexuality," Lafferty said.

"It also will infringe upon people's freedom of speech and their religious freedoms. We're seeing this happen in Canada, where pastors and other people cannot say that homosexuality is a sin. That is now considered a hate crime, and that is exactly what's going to happen here in the United States," she said.

E-mail a news tip to Lawrence Morahan.

Send a Letter to the Editor about this article.
Source: http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=/Politics/archive/200305/POL20030505b.html
 

 
Here Is A YAHOO AR Group Promoting That "AR Kindness" Again.......
 
----- Original Message -----
Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 21:41:46 EDT
From: DRCTBD@AOL.COM
To: <aars@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: DEMAND this horrible excuse for a human be tried under FELONY CRUELTY
 
 DEMAND FELONY CONVICTION FOR THIS HORRIBLE EXCUSE FOR A HUMAN BEING.
 
Source: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aars/message/5796
 
 
But Who Is This DRCTBD Who Considers Roosevelt Rhodes
A Horrible Excuse For A Human Being?
http://profiles.yahoo.com/drctatlanta
 
 
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
 
.........Roosevelt Rhodes, 66.........
........He was released after posting a $50,000 bond for appearance May 13..........

 
 
Do You Think The AR Hate People Any More Or Any Less Because Of Color And Age,
Or Do They Hate All Humans Equally As Long A They Own Animals Or Aren't Vegan?
 
 
 
Dog Owner Accused Of Cruelty
Akita Reportedly Dragged Behind Truck

By MATT BURGARD, Courant Staff Writer

A Hartford man is facing animal cruelty charges after he attached his dog to his truck with a chain and dragged the animal several blocks through the city's North End, prompting cries of alarm from children and other witnesses.

Roosevelt Rhodes, 66, told investigators he was angry with his 2-year-old Akita, Socks, because the dog had urinated in the cab of his truck while he was buying a loaf of bread at a local market, police said.

The dog is recovering at a local animal hospital.

When Rhodes walked from the store to his truck about 10:30 a.m. Tuesday, he found the puddle of urine in the cab and then chained the dog to a trailer hitch on the back bumper of the truck, police said.

Rhodes then drove more than six blocks from the store on Barbour Street to his home on Winchester Street as the dog struggled to race behind the vehicle with about 8 feet of slack on the chain, police said.

For at least two blocks, police said, the dog was unable to keep up with the truck and was dragged on its side. Police said they received numerous 911 calls from alarmed witnesses.

The dog was recovering at a veterinarian's office in Windsor on Wednesday from extreme wear to the pads on its paws and numerous cuts and scrapes, police said. Police said they hope to find it a new home.

Thomas Fuller, a veteran animal control officer for the city, said the dog's paws were bleeding extensively when he arrived. He said it was lying on the ground, breathing hard, but remained friendly and obedient as it was taken to the vet's office for treatment.

"I've been doing this a long time but I've never seen anything quite like this," Fuller said.

Speaking in front of his home Wednesday, Rhodes said the incident has been exaggerated by witnesses and police. He acknowledged chaining the dog to the truck, but he said he never drove fast enough to pose a serious threat to the animal.

"I love that dog," he said as he stood in front of a sign posted on his window saying, "Never mind the dog, beware of owner."

Rhodes said he didn't think what he did was cruel.

"That dog likes to run, so I was just letting him run along with the truck," he said.

Rhodes said he chained the dog because he was "mad" about the pool of urine in his truck, but he maintained he has always treated the dog well since buying it for $850 last year.

"I feed that dog steak once a week," he said. "These people are crazy, the way they're making this sound. I love that dog."

Andrea Marks, an Auburn Street resident who witnessed the incident, said children were running after the truck, yelling for it to stop as they saw the dog being dragged.

"The guy just kept going. It was crazy," she said. "The poor dog was too tired to keep up."

Rhodes was taken to police headquarters and booked on a charge of animal cruelty. He was released after posting a $50,000 bond for appearance May 13 in Hartford Superior Court.
Source: http://www.ctnow.com/news/local/hc-dog0501.artmay01,0,2570781.story?coll