Stanford Inn By the Sea

Love Animals? Hate HSUS!

The HSUS message is “Love Animals? Eat Them!”. How have we come to the point where “loving animals” now means – “with ketchup”?

Just as you cannot be a “meat”-eating environmentalist, you cannot support the Humane Society of the United States and be an “animal advocate” (or environmental advocate, or human health advocate, or social justice advocate). You have been deceived.

Who elected HSUS to represent animals? It did. Who gave HSUS the title of “#1 animal protection organization”? It did – along with its partners: the “meat” industry, the dairy industry, the egg industry, vivisectors, and animal abusers.

Only because this huge extremely-rich corporation claims to be on the side of animals, naive “animal advocates” embrace it – despite its despicable history and sordid current policies and actions. Among other heinous roles, HSUS is a public relations firm for animal abusers who need a makeover of their tarnished images – witness serial killer Wolfgang Puck, serial killer Michael Vick, serial killers United Egg Producers, serial killers and vivisectors Iams and Eukanuba “meat” dog foods, and serial killer and vivisector Procter & Gamble – all darlings of HSUS, the darling of “animal advocacy” (even though HSUS itself is being run by a serial killer of 50,000 pigs annually – Vice President Joe Maxwell).

Do animal advocates rise up against HSUS, one of the most detrimental corporations to animals on the planet? No, they make dumb excuses for it. HSUS is using some brilliant form of anti-vegan reverse psychology. HSUS has something up its sleeve in the future; you would want a bigger cage if you were a chicken; HSUS is investing in fake “meat” and egg companies; Dr. Greger is a nice guy; the world isn’t going to go vegan tomorrow; you wouldn’t want to be in a gestation crate, blah, blah, blah.

What HSUS has up its sleeve in the future is its crucial contribution to a 70% increase in worldwide consumption of “animal products”, and opening new markets for premium-priced “animal products” in the US.

As a full-fledged member of the “Global Agenda for Sustainable Livestock”, the Humane Society and its partners – including International Meat Secretariat, International Dairy Federation, International Egg Commission, Livestock Farming and Local Development, International Feed Industry Federation, Canadian Cattlemen’s Association, various animal agriculture agencies from the US to China to Asia to Africa, and the very pro-“meat” UN FAO (Food And Agriculture Organization) – have banded together with the stated goal “TO PRODUCE MORE”. HSI (HSUS’ Humane Society International) plays a key role in the plan to produce more flesh, dairy, and eggs, by giving cover to an industry that knows that consumers are concerned about the “treatment” of animals, concerns easily assuaged by a “humane” stamp of approval. The credible deception provided by HSUS/HSI also provides a “sustainable” stamp of approval on that which is unsustainable and environmentally catastrophic. The HSUS threat to the environment is many-fold. It considers deforestation, resource depletion, soil erosion, desertification, habitat destruction, and climate change all to be “sustainable”. When it promotes “grass-fed pasture-raised grazing”, the result is animals who produce up to 400% more methane than their intensively confined counterparts. When it cites climate-change statistics, HSUS clings to a completely discredited FAO report blaming animal agriculture for 18% of human-caused greenhouse gas emissions. One would think that an “animal advocate” (or environmental advocate) would enthusiastically publicize the most credible climate change analysis to date – that from climate specialists at the World Bank, Goodland and Anhang, who, in “Livestock and Climate Change”, estimate animal agriculture to be responsible for at least 51% of human-caused greenhouse gas. If HSUS were to embrace science over greed, it would have to promote veganism, which would be intolerable to its “meat”- industry partners. In fact, meat-head H$U$ CEO Wayne Pacelle must have missed the memo from the meat heads of the UN FAO who recently decided that 18% is bad publicity for animal ag – so they decided to lower their estimate to 14%.

Practiced at the art of deception, this money-hungry rancher and butcher advocacy group still covets the “animal advocacy” revenue stream, so it throws the vegans a bone in the form of Michael Greger and Paul Shapiro. Greger brings undeserved favor (and donations that will never finance vegan activism) to HSUS by going to vegan events and telling vegans how good they are and what a healthy choice they made. Presumably, he will not be speaking at events that are now the foundation of HSUS policy, such as “Hoofin’ It”, a four-night eating spree in Denver restaurants of hoofed animals, cows, pigs, sheep, bison, who somehow missed the protection of the “#1 animal protection organization” and Paul Shapiro, Vice President of Farm Animal Protection. Shapiro can’t even protect animals from his co-workers at the office, like Joe Maxwell.

Does Shapiro tell us not to eat Joe Maxwell’s murdered pigs, or the screaming “hoofed animals”, whose throats are slashed, for another fun HSUS event? Does Dr. Michael Greger, who says he PROUDLY serves as HSUS VP of Public Health & Animal Agriculture, speak out against the public health threat that is the policies of his employer? his voice is silenced by his paycheck. Is it not the most egregious conflict of interest and morality for a medical doctor (who obviously knows the consequences of “animal product” consumption) to PROUDLY serve a cut-throat corporation whose mission is more and more “animal product” consumption, more and more heart disease, cancer, stroke, diabetes, obesity? Why aren’t Greger and Shapiro speaking at “Hoiofin’ It”? It’s obvious. They are reserved for vegan events to maintain the vegan revenue stream, and the perpetual brainwashing of vegans.

Those vegans who refuse to be obediently and dutifully brainwashed into hoofin’ it for “meat”-industry front group HSUS are then subject to marginalization and ridicule as impractical extremist radical activists, reflecting a routine strategy employed by industry PR.

CyberSociology Magazine, in a discussion of corporate counter strategies against campaigns, writes: “PR guru, Rafael Pagan, has outlined a three step divide and conquer strategy on how corporations can defeat public interest activists who apparently fall into four distinct categories: radicals, opportunists, idealists, and realists. The goal is to isolate the radicals, cultivate the idealists, and educate them into becoming realists, then co-opt the realists into agreeing with industry.”

In a 1991 speech to the National Cattlemen’s Association entitled “Take an Activist Apart and What Do You Have? And How Do You Deal with Him/Her?”, Ronald Duchin, a protege of Pagan, said: “‘Radical activists’ want to change the system; have underlying socio/political motives’…I would categorize their principal aims…as social justice and political empowerment…The ‘idealist’ is easier to deal with…’Idealists’…want a perfect world…Because of their intrinsic altruism, however, …[they] have a vulnerable point…If they can be shown that their position is in opposition to an industry…and cannot be ethically justified, they [will] change their position…The two easiest subtypes to join the corporate side of the fight are the ‘realists’ and the ‘opportunists’…By definition, an ‘opportunist’ takes the opportunity to side with the powerful for career gain, and has skin in the game for visibility, power [and] followers…The ‘realist’, by contrast, is more complex but the most important piece of the puzzle….[Realists are able to] live with trade-offs; willing to work within the system; not interested in radical change; pragmatic. The realists should always receive the highest priority in any strategy dealing with a public policy issue.”

As reported in Mint Press News, Duchin outlined a corresponding three-step strategy to “deal with” these four activist subtypes. First, isolate the radicals. Second, “cultivate” the idealists and “educate” them into becoming realists. And finally, co-opt the realists into agreeing with industry.

“If your industry can successfully bring about these relationships, the credibility of the radicals will be lost and opportunists can be counted on to share in the final policy solution.”

It is disheartening to hear industry propaganda as the talking points of “animal advocacy”, but the seeds were planted long ago, and now activism is plant-based, in a bad way – a movement seemingly run by plants. We are in an era when it is impossible to differentiate “animal advocates” from animal killers. The caring but confused, the compassionate but uneducated, follow their marching orders and become egg salesmen, at the behest of United Egg Producers, and are led by HSUS and its groupie groups, Mercy for Animals, Farm Sanctuary, Compassion Over Killing, In Defense of Animals, FARM, into committing the greatest betrayal of animals ever. Through the deceptive leadership of HSUS, “animal advocates” who supported Proposition 2 in California and amendments to the Egg Products Inspection Act from HSUS and its chicken-massacring partner, United Egg Producers, are now responsible for new “humane” standards for battery cage imprisonment allocating 67 square inches per bird, about 8.2 inches by 8.2 inches. Good work for millions and millions of mutilated animals, “animal advocates”! “Furnished enriched” battery cages, once condemned as unacceptably cruel, and opposed by animal advocates, are now being installed by industry with the “animal advocacy seal of approval”. Sorry, chickens – they know not what they do. Those “animal advocates” who cheer investments by HSUS in an egg alternative, or the 1000th “meat” alternative on the market, should remember – the chickens suffering the consequences of HSUS’ actions have nothing to cheer.

Equally vacuous was the Smithfield gestation crate 10-year phase-out announced in 2007, and celebrated by HSUS as a revolutionary victory. A couple of years later, Smithfield reneged, saying such a program was not economically feasible. Who cares? HSUS got good PR, more donations, “animal advocates” got their reason to pop the cork on another champagne bottle. Let’s raise our glasses in another toast to all the empty HSUS promises from everyone from McDonald’s to Tyson’s to Whole Foods, and celebrate what only happens in our minds.

Donors to the Humane Society of the United States will be happy to know that $15.7 million of their money was handed over to Ringling Brothers / Feld Entertainment in a federal racketeering settlement. Charity Navigator issued a donor advisory concerning HSUS and its false claims that the settlement would be covered by insurance. HSUS announced it was asking Ringling Brothers to spend the $15.7 million fighting the ivory trade. Why should it? HSUS didn’t spend the $15.7 million to fight ivory when it had that money (although it still has $200 million in the bank). The elephants can now thank H$U$ for however many bullhooks made of gold that the circus chooses to buy.

Don’t worry about HSUS’ financial future – the deceptive name of this corporation and its deceptive tear-jerking ads in the middle of the night rake in hundreds of millions from people who think they are donating to help puppies and kittens in shelters with which HSUS has absolutely no connection. (You must donate locally for that.)

It used to be 3 strikes and you’re out. How many strikes are you willing to give HSUS? How much suffering and murder will you allow to masquerade as compassion? How many animals are you willing to sacrifice to delusion?

Love Animals? Hate HSUS!

Love Animals? Come to this:

Leave a Comment

Loving Hut San Francsisco Sunset