A successful Protest at Gurgaon

Dear friends,

The protest at Gurgaon went very well and thanks to all the good people who were in person and in spirit with us. The protest started from the office of the Municipal Commissioner, where he addressed the crowd and supported this movement. He has set a very good example for others to follow.
Then we moved on to office of the D.C. who wasnt present. Representations in writing were given to all these people, except the Commissioner of Police who REFUSED to meet the crowd or support the movement to protect and save animals. Strangely he didnt address the crowd or meet them outside his office despite many requests made by children and senior citizens present there. So to many it was apparent as to how so many cows are illegally exported right from the N.H.-8 every day without the police knowing anything about it. His office is just a km away from the highway from where 1000s of cows are taken for meat and skin to other states and countries.
The protest ended at the local district court where many lawyers also joined the rally and gave their views.
We wish that next time more people could feel their moral obligation as humans to join such events which are constant reminders to the administration that we are still alive and awake.
We all are obliged and answerable to such injustice which happens to anyone whether animals or humans.

Here are some pictures of the protest :
http://picasaweb.google.com/rishidev000/GurgaonRallyMarch202010

A press release is also below
Thanks
Rishi Dev

Citizens of Gurgaon Rise Against Atrocities on Animals

Public Demonstration Demands Action from District Administration

GURGAON, March 20th 2010 : In a historic demonstration of public sentiment against widespread and open abuse, killing, poaching and illegal trade in animals, a protest march was held by citizens of Gurgaon today. More than 200 people from different localities, activists from across NGOs, senior citizens, children and residents from diverse walks of life, marched and presented memorandums to the Deputy Commissioner of Gurgaon, the District & Sessions Judge and the Police Commissioner. The march brought spontaneous support from a large number of social and animal welfare organizations, schools, village panchayats and Universities including the Jawaharlal Nehru University and the corporates in the city. Many speakers came out openly against the morally outrageous cruelties against animals and the apathetic attitude and ignorance about laws both of general masses and the police. The chief speakers were Ms. Sreerupa Mitra Chowdhury ( prominent social activist),Mr. Sikand (senior most qerwa activist),Mr. Mahendra Singh Tokas(Cow activist), Mr. Ishwar Singh Sangwan(prominent lawyer), Mr. R.S.Rathee(prominen t public figure in Gurgaon), Ms. Vidya Sangwan(social worker and animal activist), Kamal Vij(community leader in DLF),Tulika Mehra (social worker) and Varsha Sharma(Founder Princeton Animal Fan Club). These representations called upon the police to discharge its constitutional duty and implement the law ; both of which are seriously and openly compromised. While various laws (listed below) exist to protect animals, they are rarely implemented :

1.The Constitution of India, Directive Principles of State Policy, Article 51A.

2.Indian Penal Code, Section 38 (J)

3.Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act (Act 59, of 1960)

4.Wildlife Protection Act (1972) Sections 9, 39, 40 (2)

5. Delhi Police Act,1978 (applicable to Gurgaon by virtue of NCR status)

6.Punjab Prohibition of Cow Slaughter Act (1955) Applicable to Haryana : Sections 3, 4A,4B, 5

Most speaker were in agreement that, "Touted as 'Guru Dronacharya Ki Pavitra Nagri' on government websites' and as 'Cybercity' to MNCs, Gurgaon is witness to daily, large scale abuse, illegal slaughter and trade in animals. The massacre is in open violation not only of several sections of the law and the Constitution of India, but every acceptable norm of human behaviour. This cannot be allowed to go on".

"We hope to remind society and local regulators of the hallowed Indian tradition of respect for all life and for mother nature. Sadly, these cultural and religious values which our ancestors abided by and which are the lifeblood of Indian civilization, are being rapidly eroded" they said.

With its rich inheritance of flora and fauna, Gurgaon , is uniquely positioned. It is the duty of all citizens to ensure this "millennium city" does not descend further into corruption, crime and ignorance.

END

Prema:9811832624

Media Contacts :

Anjali Pratap : 9810321877

Tulika:9899236929

Horses Belong in Pastures: Protest Sunday 2-7-10 @ 1:00 PM-Action Alert!

****Cross Post Freely****

Horses Belong in Pastures...




...not on the streets of New York City

Protest: Sunday, Feb. 7, 2010 @ 1:00 PM

Since we began our focused Carriage Horse campaign, we have been at the
hack line multiple times and when not there visibly, we have had
volunteers monitoring the activities of the carriage drivers covertly.
On January 27, 2010, an inspection of the water troughs, revealed that
water was unavailable to the horses. The water troughs were either
empty, had a small amount of dirty water or were strewn with garbage.
Horses were not being watered with buckets or from hydrants. This is in
direct violation of city regulations.

Upon inspection, activists have found carriage horse drivers to be
non-compliant with many of the regulations. No rest stops, dry water
troughs, exposed to the freezing cold and icy rain and overcharging
passengers. Our experiences have shown us, that for the most part, the
drivers are rude, obnoxious thugs who care little for the welfare of the
horses, who provide them with their income. Activists have been
attacked, spat upon, whipped and verbally assaulted with the most vile
and abusive language. Carriage drivers have dropped their pants with
children watching from the seats of their cabs. Horses have been
whipped and abused in our presence....all of this, in the direct view of
New York City's tourists.

Clearly, the people who make their living off of the toil and suffering
of these poor pitiful horses are angry about our regular presence. At
our last protest, an industry representative parked illegally in a
crosswalk, walked her dog over to the protesters in an attempt to get
her dog to "water" the activists. When her dog failed to perform, she
rolled her windows down and blasted obnoxiously loud music in an effort
to drown out the free speech of the protesters....that didn't work
either. NYPD tried to move her out of her illegal parking spot several
times, but were unsuccessful and choose to harass peaceful protesters
instead.

Consequently, New York activists will be gathering at the hack line
again, this Sunday and regularly thereafter. Please join us at our next
scheduled protest:

When: Sunday, February 7, 2010
Time: 1:00 PM (Other Protests to Follow)
Where: Grand Army Plaza, New York City
59th Street & 5th Avenue at the Hack Line

If you are coming to the protest, please dress warmly as it is often
very cold and windy at Central Park. Hats, gloves, scarves and any
other cold weather gear are encouraged. Dress in layers. Double layers
of socks and gloves. You can find hand and toe warmers at many area
sporting goods stores and drug stores are even starting to carry them.
They are inexpensive and will help you keep warm and stay out longer.
Don't forget water. Cold weather is just as dehydrating as hot weather
and just like the horses, humans need water too. After the carriage
horse protest we will be doing other protests for the rest of the
afternoon.

Actions Needed:

1. Pass this information along to anyone you know who may be
visiting New York City. Ask them not to support this cruel and
inhumane tradition. The upcoming Valentine's Day Weekend is a huge
one for the carriage horse trade. WAR will be organizing a full
weekend of activities, February 12 - 14, 2010. Stay tuned for
announcements.

2. Contact New York City officials to tell them how you feel about
the carriage horse trade:

Call/write/e-mail:
Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg
City Hall
New York, NY 10020-1175

PHONE 311 (or 212-NEW-YORK outside NYC)
FAX (212) 788-2460

e-mail: http://www.nyc.gov/html/mail/html/mayor.html


If you live in New York City, you can also write to your
City Council Representative.
Locate your representative here:

http://www.nyccouncil.info/constituent/member_list.cfm


3. If you live in New York City volunteer to monitor the hack line
to document abuse. Or you can hand out flyers to potential
customers. (We can provide you with signs and literature and tell
you more about how you can do this)

4. Host a showing of Blinders, the film produced by Donny Moss, to
raise awareness of this issue. You can purchase a DVD at the
Blinders website. If you would like to have a speaker at your film
showing, contact us at Win Animal Rights.
http://www.blindersthemovie.com/


The WAR Open House tentatively scheduled for February 6th has been
postponed. As soon as we secure an appropriate venue, we will
reschedule this event whose focus will be on horses, with a
screening of Blinders. If anyone knows of a meeting place with
equipment for a screening, please let us know.

Visit the WAR Calendar for future events:
http://calendar.yahoo.com/winanimalrights

Visit the WAR MySpace page: http://www.myspace.com/winanimalrights

Visit the WAR Facebook page:
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Win-Animal-Rights/25169195791


For more info contact Win Animal Rights at: centcom@war-online.org

Call: 646.267.9934 or visit the WAR website at: http://war-online.org

When is a Rescue Not a Rescue?

Rescued turkeys at Farm SanctuaryCan a rescue be called a rescue if you purchase the animal? What if the animal would have been killed if you did not purchase him or her?

In general, legitimate animal rescuers and sanctuaries do not purchase animals. Purchasing animals supports breeders and supports a system that perpetuates animal breeding, use and suffering. For example, Persians and Friends Rescue "does NOT buy animals from breeders to save their life." Limbe Wildlife Center, which saves primates and other animals from the bushmeat trade in Cameroon, states, "We continually tell people that we do not buy animals, as it will only encourage further hunting." Pet Jamboree, a rescue group in Indiana says, "No, we WILL NOT purchase your litter of animals. We are not brokers. We do not purchase animals for resale."

This principle also applies to rescuing humans. Free the Slaves, an organization that rescues modern-day human slaves explains, "Buying slaves in order to free them encourages trafficking."

That's why I was so disappointed to hear about Karen Dawn, a vegan activist and author, purchasing two live turkeys before they could be slaughtered, and calling it a "rescue." She's not even going to take care of the turkeys herself. The turkeys she purchased last year went to live at Animal Acres. This year's turkeys will go to The Gentle Barn Foundation.

Then how do farmed animals end up at sanctuaries? The vast majority were not purchased by activists or the sanctuaries. They fell off of trucks on the way to slaughter, they were left for dead at stockyards, or they escaped from farms or slaughterhouses. And sometimes, hundreds or thousands of animals are suddenly in need of rescue, like when floodwaters in Iowa destroyed factory farms full of pigs.

Yes, the turkeys Dawn purchased are alive today because of her actions. But I wouldn't call it a rescue. What do you think?
Full article:
http://animalrights.about.com/b/2009/11/29/when-is-a-rescue-not-a-rescue.htm

PETA Classified as a “Terrorist Threat” by the USDA

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals has been classified as as a “terrorist threat” in a document created by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

The USDA created a new “APHIS Facility Security Profile” form to send to animal experimentation facilities. Recipients were asked to answer about their experiences, and return the form to the government so the USDA can better meet their needs.

In one section of the form, on p4, item #2 B and C, PETA is listed as a “domestic special interest terrorist”:

B. Terrorist Threat. What terrorist activities have occurred in or around your building/facility in the past 5 years (documented cases)? Please check all that apply.

[ ] Attack from international terrorists
[ ] Attack from domestic special interest terrorists
-[ ] Earth Liberation Front (ELF)
-[ ] Animal Liberation Front (ALF)
-[ ] People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA)
-[ ] Animal Defense League (ADL)
-[ ] Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty (SHAC)
-[ ] Formal hate group(s) (please specify):
-[ ] Other (please specify): ____________________
[ ] Cyber Attack from a known or unknown source.

I have written extensively on this site about how the ELF and ALF have become the number one domestic terrorism threat, even though they have targeted property and not people. And Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty activists were convicted on “terrorism” charges for running a website that vocally supported the actions of those groups. The listing of PETA and the Animal Defense League is something else entirely.

PETA is perhaps the most recognized organization in the animal rights movement. They are known for their undercover investigations, and their use of celebrities and outlandish media stunts to draw attention to factory farming, fur, circuses and animal experimentation.

Regardless of how you feel about PETA and their tactics, they are a lawful, above-ground, national non-profit.

So why in another section of the USDA form, are they listed as a possible answer under “Greatest Threat or Danger. What do you consider the greatest source of danger to your organization and/or fellow workers?”

Because they expose what goes on behind closed doors.

Justin Goodman, research associate supervisor for PETA, had a fantastic oped in The Sacramento Bee about the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act and the misuses of the “terrorism” label against non-violent activists. In California, four activists are facing terrorism charges for protesting at individuals homes and allegedly creating fliers with names and addresses on them.

From Goodman’s oped:

This should give all Americans pause. People who engage in nonviolent protests and civil disobedience are sitting in jail cells, stigmatized by one of the most politically charged and discrediting labels of our time, while people who wake up every morning and go to jobs in which they torment and kill animals in laboratories continue to enjoy their freedom, paychecks, social lives and families.

Animal industries are quite open about their desire to use terrorism laws to keep their practices out of the public spotlight. I recently posted about the Animal Agriculture Alliance calling for federal prosecution of undercover investigators. It’s not because the investigators are violent. It is because they pose an even greater threat: educating the public.

As Goodman wrote: “To shield them from public opinion and discussion and to protect them from peaceful and heretofore lawful pickets by locking up those who dare to challenge the suffering that occurs inside laboratories is an attack on every American’s right of protest.”

Related posts:

How Corporate Provacateurs Made Fran Trutt an “Animal Rights Terrorist”
Environmentalist Sentenced to 21 Years as a “Terrorist”; Violent Racists Receive Half That
2 Animal Rights Activists Arrested as “Terrorists” for Freeing Mink in Utah

Egypt supermarket displays lambs ahead of holiday; offends animal rights activists

CAIRO: The sound of a baby lamb startles a few customers at an
Egyptian supermarket into a stupor. The shock of seeing a small baby
lamb fenced in a tiny three feet by three feet container angers many,
who stop and watch the small brown animal stumble to and fro, the
almost shrieking “bah, bah” coming from its young mouth. The
displaying of the animal, in such a public venue, has left many,
Egyptians and foreigners, questioning the worth of the owner’s
decision to show the small creature.
...
Yehya Abdallah, an employee who sees the congregation of frustrated
customers, believes they need to understand that these animals are
“for the purpose of eating.” He says that the idea of animal rights is
something that has been created by foreigners who don’t understand the
realities of life in Egypt.

“Animals are for food, so this is just normal and we shouldn’t get
angry over how this animal is treated,” he argues. And what about the
other lamb who died because of the conditions? “Animals die, we eat
them, so what?” The condescension being handed to Egyptians asking why
the animal is being treated this way tells a lot, says Amina Abaza,
the head the Society for the Protection of Animal Rights in Egypt
(SPARE).

--
full story:
http://bikyamasr.com/?p=6138

Animal rights group dicusses MSU's practices

A national organization is calling on MSU officials to consider
alternatives to how the university teaches its veterinary students.

Representatives from Animalearn, a division of the nonprofit animal
advocacy and educational organization American Anti-Vivisection
Society, questioned MSU’s past practices of purchasing live animals
from Class B animal dealers at a lecture Wednesday, but said the
university is making progress. Students Promoting Animal Rights, or
SPAR, hosted the event.

The group released a report in April detailing its analysis of public
universities in 24 selected states based on information it received
from the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Institutional Animal
Care and Use Committee.

--
full story:
http://www.statenews.com/index.php/article/2009/11/animal_rights_group_dicusses_msus_practices

Group targets U animal scientist

The school raised security for one of its researchers after an animal
rights activist group singled him out on its website.
...
University of Minnesota police have increased patrols near the home of
a Medical School animal researcher after a posting on an animal rights
activist website displayed his name and photograph and noted that "...
we should not be surprised when the unconscionable violence inflicted
upon animals is justifiably visited upon their tormentors."

The Internet posting went up late last week on the website
NegotiationIsOver.com in reaction to a Star Tribune story about a
multimillion-dollar national campaign by biomedical researchers,
including U Prof. Dick Bianco, to increase lagging support for medical
and scientific tests using animals.

--
full story:
http://www.startribune.com/local/69622092.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUUZ

Law student sets sights on defending animals’ rights

The environmental law program brought Cara Hunt to UVic. But she has
ended up dedicating her time on campus to protecting and advancing the
rights of animals.

“Animal law is the pre-eminent social justice issue of our time,” says
Hunt. “More people are going vegan and vegetarian every day.”

Animal law is any legal issue, legislation or case law that relates to
animals and their interests.

Hunt, 35, graduates with numerous awards and scholarships. She sits on
the executive of the animal law section with the BC Branch of the
Canadian Bar Association, and she is a past executive director of the
Student Animal Legal Defense Fund.

--
full story:
http://ring.uvic.ca/09nov05/hunt.html

Ethicist challenges man-animal 'speciesism'

The animal liberation movement is a “far-reaching revolution,”
philosopher and animal rights advocate Peter Singer told a packed
MacMillan 117 Tuesday night. In his lecture, titled “Ethics and
Animals: Where we’ve come from, and where we need to go,” the
world-renowned ethicist shared his controversial views about the
ethical basis for giving animals the same moral considerations as
humans and the justification for treating all beings as a “community
of equals.”

“We should give interests equal consideration, whatever those
interests might be,” Singer said. “It’s hard to say that species
membership should mark a morally crucial divide.”

Because animals suffer like human beings and can feel pain, Singer
said, humans cannot justify exploiting other species for food
production and research. “This equal consideration of interests is one
that we routinely violate,” he said.

Singer, a professor at Princeton, came to Brown with support from the
Brown Animal Rights Club and the Kaleidoscope Lecture Fund, a group
promoting the expression of diversity of ideas and opinions at the
University. Though his appearances have spurred protests in the past,
Tuesday’s talk occurred without incident, save a quiet protest and
pamphleting from members of the Lyndon LaRouche movement before the
event.

--
full story:
http://www.browndailyherald.com/ethicist-challenges-man-animal-speciesism-1.2049447

Jonathan Safran Foer - America's #1 Terrorist?

With the publication of Jonathan Safran Foer's captivating and
powerful book, Eating Animals, much has been said and written about
his undercover investigative work, which gives America a view inside
the hidden world of factory farms.

What has not been commented on, however, is the disquieting fact that
under existing federal and state laws, Mr. Foer's undercover actions
-- while clearly an important public service -- are actually illegal,
and what's more, they constitute acts of domestic terrorism.

Sound absurd? It should. But the reality is this:

In 2006, President Bush signed into law a little-known but sweeping
piece of legislation called the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act
(AETA), an expansion of the previously existing and equally
little-known Animal Enterprise Protection Act.

With speed and lack of reflection rivaling the passage of the USA
Patriot Act after 9/11, Congress pushed this animal industry-crafted
law through in a single day, with only a lone dissenting vote in
opposition, that of Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich.

Was Mr. Kucinich the only one to read that AETA makes into domestic
terrorism any actions that physically interfere with the operation of
any animal enterprise, or that cause physical or economic damage to
the said enterprise, regardless of motive or reason.
...
One person who tried to warn Congress of the threat of such
prosecutions was investigative journalist Will Potter, who testified
about the civil liberties implications of AETA before its passage, and
who continues to be the lone voice covering this issue at his
excellent and eye-opening blog, greenisthenewred.com, which draws
chilling parallels between the persecution of animal rights and
environmental activists today and the civil rights abuses of the
McCarthy era.

Consider this:

In 2006, six young American activists affiliated with the animal
rights group Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty USA received a combined
sentence of 23 years in federal prison, simply for operating a website
that called for legal protests against the multinational animal
testing giant Huntingdon Life Sciences (HLS) and its suppliers.
...
We, as a nation, must demand the immediate repeal of AETA and related
laws, which harm both animals and consumers, protecting only the
profits of huge corporations who operate behind closed doors with
increasingly little scrutiny, or as they would clearly prefer it: with
no scrutiny at all.

--
full story:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mikko-alanne/jonathan-safran-foer---am_b_340586.html

Bob Barker Establishes Endowment for Animal Rights

(Springfield, MO) -- Retired "Price is Right" host Bob Barker may not
be on TV anymore, but he's making news in the Ozarks again. The TV
icon came home to Drury University to drop another major financial
gift on the school. Barker wanted to tell us about the first of its
kind program the money will fund.

"What we're doing here today is something they're going to be talking
about all across the country" says Bob Barker, Drury Alumni.

It's a check for $1,000,000 that will start that dialogue. Barker is
giving his alma matter the money to establish the Dorothy Jo Barker
Professorship in Animal Rights. Named for Barker's late wife, the
program will offer intense course study on animal issues like cruelty
and philosophy.

--
full storyhttp://www.envirolink.org/external.html?itemid=200910280026450.0675339

UK Police Spying Began With Animal Rights Activists Then Expanded to Other Groups

There has been a slew of incredible, and disturbing, reporting by the UK Guardian recently on how police have rebranded activism as “domestic extremism” and “domestic terrorism.” Environmental activists, antiwar activists, animal rights activists and many more groups have been targeted. Specifically, police have gathered personal information on thousands of activists who simply attend protests or political meetings, and created massive national databases.

For instance, this “spotter card” was distributed to police officers in preparation for protests at Britain’s largest arms fair. According to the Guardian:

These so-called “spotter cards” are issued by police to identify individuals they consider to be potential troublemakers because they have appeared at a number of demonstrations.

One of the individuals featured at ‘H’ is Mark Thomas, a comedian and political activist. He has no criminal record. In a column, he noted how this scaremongering reflects truly misplaced priorities:

While being wanted outside the arms fair, I was legitimately inside researching a book on the subject, and uncovered four companies illegally promoting “banned” torture equipment.

Perhaps the most important bit of information, I think, is buried a bit in the story. According to this investigative piece by the Guardian:

Acpo’s national infrastructure for dealing with domestic extremism was set up with the backing of the Home Office in an attempt to combat animal rights activists who were committing serious crimes. Senior officers concede the criminal activity associated with these groups has receded, but the units dealing with domestic extremism have expanded their remit to incorporate campaign groups across the political spectrum, including anti-war and environmental groups that have only ever engaged in peaceful direct action.

If you’re familiar with this site and the Green Scare, you know that one of the key points I try to hit home, repeatedly, is that environmental and animal rights activists may be among the first targets in these political crackdowns, but they will not be the last. By the admission of some government officials in the UK, this has clearly been the case.

Whether or not that has been the official policy in the United States, the same dynamic is at play. If we do not stop the terrorism rhetoric, legislation, court cases and scare-mongering in its tracks, no activist and no social movement will remain untouched.

Of course, you could always just continue listening to the soundbites of police and government officials, like this one from Anton Setchell, who is in charges of the “domestic extremism” unit in the UK. People who find themselves on the databases, he says, “should not worry at all.”

Related posts:

Animal Rights Activist Named Alongside Bin Laden on FBI’s Terrorist List
Legal Handbook for Animal Rights and Environmental Activists
How Corporate Provacateurs Made Fran Trutt an “Animal Rights Terrorist”

Interview with Animal Defenders International (ADI)

For Paragon Magazine and Paragon Earth
Also appeared in Paragon Music Magazine Issue #44 October 2009



Respondent is Jan Creamer, Chief Executive, ADI

Lisa Selvaggio: First off, thanks for taking the time do this interview. Since Animal Defenders International is based both in the UK and the US, you'd be able to tell us if there are any major differences in the issues surrounding animal rights between the two nations? What needs to be worked on most in each country?
JC: In the UK, although we have some potentially good legislation to protect animals, progress is always slow because we take so long to take action over anything - and we have a very long way to go on the protection of animals used in businesses to make money. For example, the Government promised a ban on the use of wild animals in circuses three years ago, and we are still waiting! As a result of Government inaction, three new elephants have been brought to the UK to perform in circuses. Yet 80% of people are against animal circuses. In South America, we provide the evidence and get bans on animal circuses in half the time! The biggest problem in the U.S. is that there is no good animal protection legislation in place, so we have a lot of work to do there, to educate people about animal suffering, but also, to get some laws to protect animals.

LS: Are there any particular laws making it difficult for animal rights groups like yourselves to do their job in both the UK and US? Which country has laws that are more difficult to navigate?
JC: It is not so much the laws, but the attitude of governments and officials. The U.S. is more open, but it is larger and more complex - each state is like a mini country and we have to negotiate local and state legislation, as well as national. However, their officials have a generally more open attitude to NGOs (non-governmental organisations) like us, which makes it easier to work with them. In the UK, our government departments are the opposite; not really willing to work with NGOs or take on board public concerns - much more of a "closed door" policy. In Europe, we can just knock on an MEP's door and chat to them!

LS: ADI campaigns against animals being used in entertainment. For those readers who don't know what the problem is with using animals for things like advertisements or TV/movies, can you explain?
JC: The problem with using animals for films, advertising, or television is that in order to get the animal to do what you want it to do, you must deprive it of its own kind, its family, its enjoyment of its natural lifestyle and you have to coerce it in some way. The trainer becomes the sole source of comfort, approval, affection, food, water, life itself. We don't buy the "training with kindness" claims. We have worked alongside the trainers and can tell you that more frequently it is training by punishment or withdrawal of food, water, or approval of the trainer than anything else. Being shut away and lonely can also be a punishment. That's the hidden price of our entertainment.

LS: For most people, it's obvious why keeping animals in circuses and zoos/aquariums is inhumane, but others still insist that these places serve as a place of learning for children, especially since they wouldn't be able to see these animals otherwise. How do you approach people with this mindset to convince them that the keeping of animals like this benefits no one?
JC: Circuses, zoos, aquariums teach children nothing about the real lives of the animals they display. These places are there to make money. They treat the animals like exhibits, with labels, tiny spaces, impoverished lives, and talk about conservation. The real conservation takes place in the animals' countries of origin. They could spend their money there and protect the animals in their environment. Depriving an animal of the life it was born for, just so that someone can see it more conveniently than if they had to look for it and observe it in the wild, is plain wrong. It is not education either, because it is an unnatural "exhibit" - it says nothing about the way the animal really lives, how it communicates, what it is like in its family group. The true essence and understanding of their existence cannot be replicated in a glass case or a cage.

LS: In your experience, what have you found to be the most effective form of outreach? Is it in the form of educational presentations, passing out flyers at events like circuses, holding rallies and protests, publishing ads like those that PETA puts out, or something else?
JC: All people are different and need to be reached in different ways, so different kinds of approach are needed; education, publications, the internet, political lobbying, protests. I think the single most effective thing that ADI does, which underpins everything we do, is that our field officers work undercover in the animal use industries and we get the evidence to present to the media and governments. I have gone undercover myself and the shock of being face to face with the truth is truly life changing. We also prosecute if we can show that laws have been broken. Seeing what really happens behind the scenes is a huge reality check for both governments and public.

LS: To be blunt, what do you think is mentally wrong with people who abuse animals or think they have dominion over them, because I just don't get it?
JC: It is very sad that some people are so full of hatred and violence that they appear to have a need to take it out on something weaker than themselves. And making animals suffer for entertainment or sport is just pathetic. Those people need to get a life. I think this is something that needs to be addressed in schools. Children should be educated to despise violence and become champions of animals - everyone must become an Animal Defender! We provide school packs.

LS: In your experience, what's the easiest, and hardest, group of people to "convert" - i.e. children, teens/young adults, religious/spiritual individuals, older people, people who are already nature lovers, etc.?
JC: It varies. Obviously those who have a vested interest in using animals for profit are always hardcore - animals are just tools or products to them - so they don't respond well if anyone is trying to curtail their activities! Disappointingly, it is sometimes people who fight for human rights that appear to feel almost threatened by the concept of animal rights. I think this is a mistaken belief that there is a kind of scale or hierarchy involved. Yet there isn't - any society that does not protect its weakest, including the other species who share our planet, is incapable of protecting its weakest humans. It is all part of the same continuum - we must develop a desire to respect and protect all. This does not mean that we cannot take action to preserve our lives; it is a question of balance. I think undoubtedly younger people are more open to new ideas and new ways of managing and sharing Planet Earth. They have a big stake in the future, and they don't have the vested self-interest of some older people.

LS: For people like myself who want to work in the animal rights movement but who can't relocate and seem to be living in an area where these jobs simply aren't available, what are the prospects of finding something non-volunteer and telecommuting, especially in this tough economy?
JC: Animal rights groups are desperate for all kinds of help. You could become a field officer and work all over the world. If you have website or IT skills you might be able to help with that kind of work. Or if you already have a job, you should hold onto it and volunteer for us, fundraising, campaigning, writing letters - if people volunteer for us on a regular basis, or intern for us, they are always top of our list when vacancies arise, because we know what they can do.

LS: Speaking of the economic downturn, how has it affected your organization?
JC: We have been hit very hard indeed. Because we are primarily a campaigning group, rather than fundraising, most of our income comes from legacies, when people leave us money in their Will. Because houses left in Wills are not selling, we are getting less and less. We are trying to find ways of keeping our most important projects going, so we are looking everywhere we can for other sources of income. We can't let the animals pay the ultimate price of the human greed that caused this dreadful financial disaster.

LS: Well, again, thanks so much for doing this interview. We always enjoy speaking with non-profits. Is there anything you'd like to add that wasn't already discussed?
JC: Yes - we have some hugely important campaigns on right now - we desperately need people to help! If you can spend a couple of hours a week volunteering locally or at our offices, please do it! Help change the world. See our website: www.ad-international.org, or call us on: 020 7630 3340.
http://www.paragonearth.org/articles/adi_int_2009.php

Pet Shop Protesters Shot–Will It Be Labeled Terrorism?

Three animal rights activists were shot with brass pellets during a recent protest against puppy mills in Santa Monica, California. According to local news outlets, the police are investigating the shootings as an assault with a deadly weapon.

About 20 activists were protesting Aquarium & Pet Center in Santa Monica, which they say sells dogs bred in puppy mills in inhumane conditions.

Carole Raphaelle Davis, the West Coast director of the Companion Animal Protection Society, said store employees have threatened the protesters and were seen laughing after three activists were hit.

The shooting resulted in minor injuries, including welts.

“It’s shocking to think that people would try to intimidate people or cause them harm simply because they expressed their views,” said WeHo council member Jeffrey Prang, who has been working with the group to write a municipal ban on the re-selling of any pets except bred or rescued animals in West Hollywood.

The incident is disturbing enough on its own, but it needs to be put in a broader context. The animal rights and environmental movements are labeled the “number one domestic terrorism threat,” according to the FBI. Some elements of those movements have engaged in property destruction, economic sabotage and arson. In the history of the U.S. animal rights movement, though, not one person has ever been targeted with physical violence and no one has been shot.

If an animal rights activist had committed a crime like this, against an animal researcher for instance, they would undoubtedly be prosecuted as a “terrorists” under the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act.

In fact, the government’s threshold for what constitutes “terrorism” is much, much lower when it comes to the conduct of animal rights and environmental activists. Right now, four animal rights activists in California are facing charges under the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act for chanting and chalking slogans on the sidewalk. They’re being labeled “terrorists.”

Incidents like this should be it abundantly clear that there are two systems of law in this country. One is for the wealthy, the corporations, the animal research industry. If they are under attack, they can lobby for new terrorism legislation and pressure the politicians and government officials who represent them to crack down on the “terrorists.” They can carve out special crimes to protect them, and only them.

The other system of law is for everybody else. If they are under attack–through violence, not just home protests or economic sabotage–well, it’s just business as usual.

So what do you think? Will the government labeling this violent, politically-motivated crime “terrorism”?

Related posts:

South Dakota “Eco-terrorism” Law Shot Down as Unnecessary
White Supremacist Opens Fire at Holocaust Museum, But Will it Be Labeled “Terrorism”?
Animal Rights Protesters Face Higher Sentences than Racist Cross Burners

National Primate Liberation Week

October 17 - 24, 2009



NYC Protests Focus On
Huntingdon Life Sciences & Fortress Investment

Each year, the animal rights movement takes a week to focus on the
plight of primates in vivisection and research laboratories. This year
the week chosen is October 17 - October 24, 2009.

During the weekend of Saturday, October 24th and Sunday, October 25th,
2009, Win Animal Rights will stage protests against Huntingdon Life
Sciences, their financial supporters and their customers, to call
attention to the suffering and death of primates at Huntingdon Life
Sciences.

On Sunday, although we will begin at a nearby address, we will be
walking one block north to the residence of the Chief Executive Officer
of Huntingdon Life Sciences, Andrew Baker. WAR considers Baker the most
heinous primate murderer in corporate America and as such is a fitting
target for National Primate Liberation Week.

Fortress Investment Group executives will be the focal point of
attention this weekend. All evidence points toward a discrepancy between
Fortress' statement and their actions. We firmly believe that they are
still in collusion with Huntingdon Life Sciences. Until we are satisfied
that they have cut all ties to Huntingdon Life Sciences/Life Sciences
Research, we will continue to deliver our message in person at their
doorsteps.

For anyone who believes that Fortress' statement should be enough to
terminate the campaign against them, consider the fact that if Fortress
had not given financial aid to Huntingdon Life Sciences, they would most
likely have closed 3 years ago. In that timeframe, approximately 540,000
innocent animals were killed by Huntingdon Life Sciences.

Please join us:

Date: Thursday, October 22, 2009 @ 5:00 pm

Where: 1345 Avenue of the Americas (54th & 55th Sts.), NYC

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Date: Saturday, October 24, 2009 @ 4:00 pm

Where: 20 W. 55th St. (5th & 6th Ave.), NYC

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Date: Sunday, October 25, 2009 @ 2:00 pm

Where: 271 Central Park West & W. 87th St., NYC

Banners, posters and literature will be provided. Just bring your
enthusiasm and a loud voice to speak out for "Primate Liberation". Dress
comfortably and come prepared to do some walking as we will most likely
be calling on other animal abusers in the neighborhood. Demos will be
spirited and peaceful and will follow all local ordinances.

For more info call: 1-646-267-9934 or e-mail: centcom@war-online.org


If you cannot make the protests, consider e-mailing or writing to
Fortress Investment Group top executives at:

Mr. Wesley Edens - Co-Chairman & Principal
wedens@fortressinv.com


Mr. Peter Briger, Jr. - Co-Chairman & Principal
pbriger@fortressinv.com


Mr. Daniel Mudd - Chief Executive Officer
dmudd@fortressinv.com


Fortress Investment Group LLC
1345 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10105, USA
Tel: 212 798 6100

For more information about Fortress visit:

http://war-online.org/Alert_FortressLies.htm


Please keep all communications with the above polite and informative.
Let them know that abusing and torturing animals is not the right way to
go. A picture may be more convincing. Visit:

http://www.shac.net/HLS/photos.html#photos/2008b.jpg


Coming events: Mark your calendars now!
(Details on many of the listings can be found on the WAR Yahoo Calendar
linked below)

Oct. 31, 2009: Halloween Parade - March for Animal Liberation - Parade
& Protests

November 27 - 29, 2009 - Fur Free Friday Weekend

Visit the WAR Calendar for future events:
http://calendar.yahoo.com/winanimalrights

Visit the WAR MySpace page: http://www.myspace.com/winanimalrights

Visit WAR on Facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Win-Animal-Rights/25169195791


For more info contact Win Animal Rights at: winanimalrights@optonline.net

Call: 646.267.9934 or visit the WAR website at: http://war-online.org


W.A.R. (WIN ANIMAL RIGHTS) is an independent non-profit organization not
affiliated or associated with SHAC, SHAC USA or any other group or
organization and does not conduct or incite any illegal activity. The
above information is not meant to incite or request any illegal actions
or illegal activities of any kind. If you have any questions about the
legality of any act, we encourage everyone receiving this (or the)
action alert(s) to check your local laws and ordinances before
proceeding to do anything.

3rd Circuit Rejects Online Activists' Free-Speech

Defense attorney says he expects the ruling will be appealed and is
'fairly sure we will wind up in the U.S. Supreme Court'
...
The First Amendment does not insulate animal rights activists from
criminal liability when they use an Internet Web site to orchestrate a
campaign of harassment, cyberattacks, vandalism and destruction of
property, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled.

In United States v. Fullmer, a three-judge panel unanimously refused
to strike down the Animal Enterprise Protection Act, rejecting
arguments by six activists -- convicted for targeting Huntingdon Life
Sciences, an animal testing firm -- who complained that the law had
effectively criminalized their legitimate political protests.

The ruling upholds convictions and prison terms for six members of
Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty, or SHAC, a group whose stated mission
was to drive Huntingdon Life Sciences out of business.

One of the judges wrote he would have overturned the protesters'
convictions on charges under the AEPA on non-constitutional grounds.

--
full story:
http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202434647989&rd_Circuit_Rejects_Animal_Rights_Activists_Online_Speech_Challenge

Protest Drug Companies on Columbus Day

Focus: Huntingdon Life Sciences Customers
Sanofi Aventis, Novartis, Bristol-Myers Squibb

Join Win Animal Rights, this Monday, as we turn our attention once again
to the the companies that allow Huntingdon Life Sciences (HLS) to
continue the killing. Right now, Huntingdon Life Sciences (trading on
the NYSE Arca as LSR) is concentrating all of their effort on a
management buyout spearheaded by Andrew Baker, CEO of Huntingdon Life
Sciences.

Regarding Fortress, SHAC UK has re-instated the campaign against
Fortress. This week, we will offer Fortress the opportunity to respond
to SHAC's charges. If proof is not forthcoming quickly, it is likely
that WAR will also reactivate the Fortress campaign. We will keep you
posted.

Huntingdon Life Sciences is a company whose primary business is death
and suffering. 500 animals are killed there every day. Their customers
are the ones that contract and pay for the killing. Without customers,
Huntingdon Life Sciences would go out of business. Join us as we mourn
the 180,000 that die every year at HLS and fight for the ones that are
still alive and waiting to die.

The best way to stop the killing at HLS is to influence their
customers. The companies that we will be visiting on Monday have the
power to discontinue the contracts that allow HLS to torture and kill
animals daily. All of our protests are peaceful and legal. If you are
free on Monday, please consider joining your voice with ours as we
advocate for the poor suffering animals at HLS.

Date: Monday, October 12, 2009 @ 2:00 pm
Where: 90 Park Ave (between 39th & 40th Sts.)
New York City

After the initial protest, we will be walking to other locations in the
general area. Please wear comfortable walking shoes or bring carfare if
you wish to take the bus or train to the next location. Posters,
banners and literature will be provided. Just bring a loud voice and
your dedication to use that voice to speak up for the animals who suffer
in silence.

If you cannot join us, please consider writing to the following:

Sanofi Aventis
90 Park Avenue
New York, NY 10016
Phone: (212) 551-4000

James Cornelius
CEO & Chairman of the Board
Bristol-Myers Squibb
345 Park Ave.
New York, NY 10154
Tel: 1.212.546.4000
james.cornelius@bms.com

residence: 25 Columbus Circle #ST59E, New York, NY 10019

Lamberto Andreotti
President and Chief Operating Officer
Bristol-Myers Squibb
345 Park Ave.
New York, NY 10154
Tel: 1.212.546.4000
lamberto.andreotti@bms.com

residence: 1 W. 64th St., New York, NY 10023

Robert Pelzer
President & CEO
Novartis Pharmaceuticals
608 Fifth Ave.
New York, NY 10020
Tel: 1.212.307.1122
robert.pelzer@novartis.com

residence: 400 E. 51st St. #24B, New York, NY 10022

Please keep all communications with the above polite and informative.
Let them know that abusing and torturing animals is not the right way to
go. A picture may be more convincing. Visit:

http://www.shac.net/HLS/photos.html#photos/2008b.jpg

Coming events: Mark your calendars now!
(Details on many of the listings can be found on the WAR Yahoo Calendar
linked below)

October 17 - 24, 2009: National Primate Liberation Week
Oct. 31, 2009: Halloween Parade - March for Animal Liberation - Parade
& Protests
November 27 - 29 - Fur Free Friday Weekend

Visit the WAR Calendar for future events:
http://calendar.yahoo.com/winanimalrights

Visit the WAR MySpace page: http://www.myspace.com/winanimalrights

Visit WAR on Facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Win-Animal-Rights/25169195791

For more info contact Win Animal Rights at: winanimalrights@optonline.net

Call: 646.267.9934 or visit the WAR website at: http://war-online.org


W.A.R. (WIN ANIMAL RIGHTS) is an independent non-profit organization not
affiliated or associated with SHAC, SHAC USA or any other group or
organization and does not conduct or incite any illegal activity. The
above information is not meant to incite or request any illegal actions
or illegal activities of any kind. If you have any questions about the
legality of any act, we encourage everyone receiving this (or the)
action alert(s) to check your local laws and ordinances before
proceeding to do anything.

CAROL J.ADAMS on ACTIVISM,VEGANISM and MODELS for CHANGE

Carol J. Adams on Activism, Veganism and Models for Change
Posted: 11 Oct 2009 09:45 PM PDT
As with many animal activists, my path to advocacy has been crisscrossed with life-changing intersections and punctuated by important milestones. One of the most influential landmarks in my road to activism was Carol J. Adams’ The Sexual Politics of Meat: A Feminist-Vegetarian Critical Theory, which compares myths about meat-eating with myths about what it means to be a man. Reading Carol’s book, it is impossible to ignore how a patriarchal society has marketed eating animal flesh as manly and debased women along the way. She’s also the author of many other books, including Living Among Meat Eaters: The Vegetarian’s Survival Handbook, and co-editor of The Feminist Care Tradition in Animal Ethics: A Reader. Recently, I had the pleasure of speaking with Carol about animal activism. Our conversation ranged from using social networks to whether activists need to watch disturbing undercover video footage. Not surprisingly, Carol began with a topic that’s close to her heart.
“We’ve got a problem with sexism in the movement, so that the people who traditionally have cared, who are women, are not always heard as well as male philosophers are,” she said. “The male philosophers the animal rights movement has held up are really wonderful people, but they draw on a male-based philosophy — that of rights or Utilitarianism — and this assumes the individual is autonomous, and it’s a male model, emphasizing rationality over caring and autonomy over interdependence. One thing the animal rights movement needs to do is to become more alert to incorporating feminist attitudes throughout the movement. So instead of having nearly-naked women saying, ‘Stop harming animals,’ we should have a variety of people saying, ‘I care about animals, and I’m a better person for that.’ Not, ‘I’m a better person than you, but maybe a better person than I was.’ Instead of being absolutely confrontational, so that we allow other people to take their unease with emotions and bring it out of themselves and blame us for making them feel uncomfortable, we can find a variety of ways to help people sit with their feelings and learn how to listen to those feelings.”
Carol, who has devoted much of her writing to exploring the links between species oppression and gender oppression, said the animal rights movement often disowns women and disowns emotions that are equated with women. “So I feel like we have to evolve the movement to lift up caring and lift up the people who care — i.e., women — rather than sexualizing them, and appealing to socialized men who have been taught that maleness equals not caring.” She believes that when it comes to animals, many otherwise caring people keep their feelings at arm’s length. “When someone tells me, ‘I don’t want to know what’s happening to animals; I’m afraid to care,’ I often say, ‘Tell me about your childhood relationships with animals.’ I want to know what kinds of scars there are from a time when they might have cared and what happened to that caring. I’ve looked at how families handle the death of a pet in the United States, and they do it really terribly — ‘Oh, it was only a pet,’ ‘We can get a new one,’ ‘Oh, stop crying’ — so that part of the movement to adulthood is putting down the feelings that are associated with being a child. But those are really good and honest feelings. That’s why in my own writing I’ve written prayers that speak in the voice of a child who’s lost a beloved companion animal to provide a way to show that grief is part of what we are going to feel if we care about animals, and to model how to move through grief.”
Yet in responding to the plight of farmed animals, Carol said, female animals are often overlooked. “It’s this abuse of female reproductivity that disappears from the radar so often. I mean, I know that animal rights groups are lifting it up more and more, but I still think that the fate of the dairy cow and the egg-laying hen is one of the most serious issues for us to address. If we eliminated forcing cows to get pregnant, you’d eliminate 50 percent of hamburgers, too.” She noted that meat-eating would not exist if female animals were not exploited. Yet, she observed, meat-eaters still manage to take credit for the presence of animals on Earth. “Meat-eaters argue, ‘Well, the animals come into life, into existence, because we want to eat them. The animals owe us their lives.’ No, the animals come into existence and owe their mothers their lives. It’s the mothers who are being the most oppressed because they’re going through constant pregnancy.”
As our conversation turned to the use of hidden cameras to capture graphic images that can be used to educate consumers and activists alike, Carol said she worries that the animal rights movement might focus too narrowly on these upsetting videos. “I think that sometimes that’s not necessarily going to be the best way to change people. I don’t want to just shock people. I know some people are changed that way. I remember when I used to go to AR conferences they’d have this one room that just showed a film with one horrible image after another. The young people coming out of that room were weeping and feeling so powerless. In terms of change, I know there’s a new Mercy For Animals video that’s tied to the egg industry. I appreciate their work, but I can’t watch these anymore, and I think it’s OK to say to people, ‘You don’t have to watch these. What we’re looking for is consciousness.’ We don’t need, necessarily, to have these images burned on our retinas.”
When I mentioned that some activists feel we owe it to the animals to watch such videos, she said, “Again, it’s a male model of change versus a feminist model of change. It’s not about owing. It’s about asking, ‘How can I nurture the best relationship possible for all animals?’ I’m an animal, too. I do not need to inflict suffering on myself if the consciousness of what’s going on is already there. I think women often are going to be more obedient to these exhortations because, again, of the sexism in our society. But if a lot of women already are socialized to care, then our experience of those videos may be drastically different, and I think that needs to be acknowledged. Extraordinary expectations do not need to be laid down on animal activists. We’re already there. We should ask, ‘What’s the best I can do as an individual linking up with others?’ Everyone answers that differently, but our answers become part of a chorus that’s the same.”

Carol J. Adams
Besides videos, then, what tools for change does Carol recommend? “In Living Among Meat Eaters I ask, ‘How do we know how change happens? Why do we think there’s one model for change?’ I think we fail to recognize that the right brain can also bring about change. That you can incubate and you can be stimulated by art to change. I think because activists are often more likely to be left brained and rational, they fail to take account of the way the right brain can be enlisted to help people change. In the book I say that meat-eaters are perfectly happy eating vegan meals, as long as they don’t know that’s what they’re doing. What I mean by that is people hate being self-conscious about what they’re eating. Eating is supposed to be directly experiential — it’s not supposed to have a theory to it. People think vegans are going to examine everything. One of the most important things I think we do is just having vegan meals for people. They leave and think, ‘Gee, Carol’s a vegan. That was a really great risotto; it was so creamy. So…that was a vegan risotto.’ So I’ve given them a chance to incubate, and the next time they come back to me they’re not as threatened, because I’ve enlisted their right brain to work with me rather than just arguing with the left brain that might not want to change.”
Carol also likes Facebook, which she joined earlier this year. “When I get friended by someone I don’t know, I generally accept the friending, but I’ll ask them to tell me about their activism,” she said. “Oh my gosh, the wonderful responses I’ve gotten! People write, ‘Thank you for asking,’ and often they’ll talk about the influence of my books. Some will say, ‘I’m a quiet activist. I’m uncomfortable speaking in public. But I make vegan meals.’ Some say, ‘I’m a full-time teacher, but I also write letters, or rescue strays and help them get new homes, or I’m doing this or organizing that.’ I’m just so grateful for them. No one has to tell them to go watch a video. They’re way beyond that.”
My sincere thanks to Carol Adams for her time and her contributions to the movement. You can learn more about Carol’s work at her Web site.
Credit:http://strikingattheroots.wordpress.com/2009/10/11/carol-j-adams-on-activism-veganism-and-models-for-change

Animal Rights Movement Finds Growing Following

By Anna Malpas

The St. Petersburg Times



Alexander Belenky / The St. Petersburg Times

Animal rights campaigners protest the wearing of fur in central St. Petersburg.

MOSCOW — Eight animal rights protesters posed in T-shirts printed with fake blood, several hiding their faces in surgical masks, outside the trial of a man accused of shooting pet dogs.

The trial could result in one of the country’s first serious convictions for animal cruelty. It also provides a showcase for a new, more radical animal activism that is gaining popularity in Russia.

Dmitry Khudoyarov is on trial at Moscow’s Cheryomushkinsky District Court on charges of killing a dog and permanently disabling a puppy by shooting them from his all-terrain vehicle.

He has pleaded guilty and could serve up to six months in jail, a year of community service, or pay a fine of up to 80,000 rubles ($2,580).

Activists standing outside the courthouse during a recent hearing wore T-shirts with splattered blood and the slogans, “Prison for the Slaughterer” and “Prison for the Serial Killer.”

“Khudoyarov is a disease of our society,” said one protester, Emilia Nadin. “This is really the first case in Russia where people have managed to bring a case to court, and it’s very important for us to create a precedent.”

Fueling their cause is the fact that the country’s courts have handed down few convictions for animal cruelty. In 2007, a guard was convicted of killing a stray dog named Ryzhik who lived in the Konkovo metro station. He received a suspended sentence of two years and eight months.

This year, residents in both the Far Eastern city of Khabarovsk and the Oryol region were convicted of killing dogs and received sentences of three months and six months of community service, respectively. A man from Samara was given a suspended sentence of one year and fined 12,000 rubles.

In 2002, a model deemed by psychiatrists to be psychologically unstable stabbed a stray dog at the Mendeleyevskaya metro station. She was sent to a psychiatric hospital, and shocked Muscovites paid for a statue of the dog to be placed in the station.

The protest outside the courthouse this month was officially a flash mob, since officials had asked them to hold the rally 2.5 kilometers away. Police stood outside the courtroom and made no attempt to move on the protesters.

“We want the guy to be jailed — and for a long time,” said protester Marat Makhmutov.

The protesters represent a secretive grass-roots organization called Alliance for Animal Rights, which Nadin said she quit her job to join full-time two years ago. She has no office, and activists print up leaflets at home or work, she said.

The group provides a more attractive face for animal rights, Nadin said. “Our position has got better, we appear on television. They used to film crazy women with unwashed hair, now it’s young people,” she said.

Makhmutov and another protester, Emil Baluyev, both wore surgical masks, which they said were to prevent them from being identified by “boneheads,” members of a group of skinheads who target and beat up anti-fascist groups.

“They monitor all this with photographs and can find us later,” Makhmutov said. “They could beat us up or kill us.”

Baluyev, a law student, said he wants to become a rights campaigner after he graduates. Makhmutov, who works in telecommunications, said he became an activist 1 1/2 years ago.

Both said they came into the animal rights movement through the punk subculture.

A nebulous organization, the Alliance for Animal Rights has no formal registration, and it is unclear who is in charge.

Its spokesman, Semyon Simonov, answered e-mails from Sochi. He said the group has 500 members and was set up five years ago, initially as a purely Internet-based project, but had been holding rallies since 2005. He said the protests usually attract 50 people, but sometimes all 500 members show up for popular issues such as homeless animals.

Among the causes that the group backs is the controversial Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty, or SHAC, campaign against British animal testing company Huntingdon Life Sciences. The international campaign calls for targeting all shareholders and partner companies. In Britain, activists have vandalized houses, published the names of investors and sent letters with threats.

Seven British activists were jailed for blackmail last year. “We call for everyone who takes part not to break the law,” Simonov said. “For us it’s important because our society could react badly to illegal actions.”

Nevertheless, he warned, “In Russia there are people who have been disappointed by legal methods, and they could ignore laws that allow the killing of animals.”

Activists said they knew of the jail terms for the British activists and were sympathetic.

“Such radical activities are over the top,” Baluyev said. “We hope to achieve success with peaceful methods, but we support these people all the same.”

“We think this is bad,” Makhmutov said of the jailings. “We feel that any defense of animals isn’t a crime.”

Full Article:

http://www.times.spb.ru/index.php?action_id=2&story_id=30006

EU blasted by campaigners over lab animal cruelty

EU blasted by campaigners over lab animal cruelty - crucial meeting on
12 October

The BUAV has today condemned the EU for ignoring public opinion after a
leaked document shows that the Council of Ministers wants researchers to
have the right to cause suffering to animals in laboratories which is
not only severe but which is also long-lasting. Such a move would result
in untold cruelty and suffering to thousands of animals across Europe.
Only recently a YouGov poll in the UK, Germany, France, Italy, Sweden
and the Czech Republic showed that a resounding 84% believe that
experiments causing severe pain or suffering - i.e. whether or not
long-lasting - should be prohibited.

The leaked document ("Proposal for a Directive of the European
Parliament and of the Council on the protection of animals used for
scientific purposes") from the EU Presidency has been sent to the
Working Party of Veterinary Experts to be discussed at its meeting next
week, 12th October. The document also gives examples of shocking
experiments that researchers want to be allowed to continue to carry out
on animals. They include: poisoning animals to death; submitting animals
to repeated electric shocks from which they cannot escape (in order to
induce 'learned helplessness'); restraining animals to such an extent
that they develop stomach ulcers or heart failure; forcing animals to
swim until they give up in exhaustion; and giving animals a lethal dose
of radiation or chemotherapy.

The animal research industry community acknowledges that these
experiments cause severe suffering but claim, absurdly, that the
suffering is not long-lasting and would therefore not even need special
permission.

The same YouGov poll showed very large majorities wishing to see bans on
the use of primates, dogs and cats in experiments causing suffering, a
ban on all experiments which are not for life-threatening or serious
human conditions; and maximum openness, with only information which is
confidential or would identify individuals or establishments withheld.
Again, EU politicians seem determined to do the exact opposite.

BUAV's Chief Executive, Michelle Thew said: "We are appalled to learn of
the proposals that the Council has made. This is a major step backwards
for animal welfare. It's high time European politicians started
listening to the public rather than the self-interested pleading of the
multi-billion pound animal research and supply industry."

ENDS