[Linda Z]

Waysider asked:

Quote

What exactly is the point of this thread?

I would imagine the point was to bring to light a horrible practice that's taking place. George's protests to the contrary, it seems quite clear that even if this practice isn't widespread, it has happened

No, we aren't the world's police force, but that doesn't mean we can't speak out against something like using live dogs for shark bait. This isn't a simple cultural difference, like eating dog meat versus eating cow meat, or having 10 wives vs. 1. I don't think anyone is trying to dictate what other cultures should allow. But I don't get the impression that dangling a living dog from a set of hooks to catch a shark is in step with the culture where this occurred, either.

I'm no extreme animal rights nutcase. I eat meat. I wear leather. I happen to love dogs and can't stand to see them abused. I don't think cows should be abused up until the time they're slaughtered for food, either. Call me a softy, and I am, but it seems to me that humans, who are supposed to be intelligent beings, have a responsibility not to abuse the helpless.

I happen to think I have just as much right to be offended about something like this taking place on foreign waters as if it had occurred in the US. I do believe I have a right to be appalled and say so, as does WhiteDove.
Will that change anything? Probably not. But does it hurt anything for me, or for WhiteDove, to express horror at such a practice? I don't see how.

[Bolshevik]

bait = abuse?

An extreme empathy for dogs probably is a cultural phenomenon.

[Linda Z]

Bolshevik, on Jan 17 2009, 06:14 PM, said:

bait = abuse?

An extreme empathy for dogs probably is a cultural phenomenon.

Perhaps, although I don't see not wanting dogs to be skewered on a huge hook (that has to be painful) and dangled into shark-infested waters as extreme at all.

[George Aar]

Oh! The HORROR!

http://www.diamond-jim.com/catjuggler/

[Linda Z]

George, you're such a stinker.

[ClayJay]

Maybe the dog in the photo is a freak and is like, really into piercing?

[Bolshevik]

"Perhaps, although I don't see not wanting dogs to be skewered on a huge hook (that has to be painful) and dangled into shark-infested waters as extreme at all."


but what about the shark? you know what they do to them? they're more important to the world ecosystems than dogs.
what about the fisherman? they got family to feed?

why zoom in on the dog?

[waysider]

ClayJay, on Jan 17 2009, 09:43 PM, said:

Maybe the dog in the photo is a freak and is like, really into piercing?

[WhiteDove]

Bolshevik, on Jan 17 2009, 09:07 PM, said:

"Perhaps, although I don't see not wanting dogs to be skewered on a huge hook (that has to be painful) and dangled into shark-infested waters as extreme at all."


but what about the shark? you know what they do to them? they're more important to the world ecosystems than dogs.
what about the fisherman? they got family to feed?

why zoom in on the dog?

Fisherman can feed their family without torturing dogs, in fact most of the fisherman there do so quite well.

[WhiteDove]

Bolshevik, on Jan 17 2009, 09:07 PM, said:

"Perhaps, although I don't see not wanting dogs to be skewered on a huge hook (that has to be painful) and dangled into shark-infested waters as extreme at all."


but what about the shark? you know what they do to them? they're more important to the world ecosystems than dogs.
what about the fisherman? they got family to feed?

why zoom in on the dog?

And dogs are more important to the world socialsystem, besides they are far more useful, they help the blind to lead productive lives ,they help the deaf to hear ,they protect our law enforcement officers, sniiff out drugs and bombs, guide the wheelchair bound , they have dialed phones for help for siezure patients, they have gone for help and returned with it for people that have fallen off cliffs or other accidents. None of which I have seen a shark do.
And they are the most loyal things despite our human tendencies to mistreat them and break their hearts and spirit.

You Didn't Even Say Goodbye

"Woof!" I said as you started the car,
"Hooray!" I said, it's my first time afar.

The scents we were passing were all new to me,
For it was my first introduction to this mystery.

As we got out of the car I embraced you with joy,
After all you remembered to bring my favorite toy!

You threw it once or twice, of which I retrieved,
But on the third it seemed you were ready to leave.

You threw it long and hard and I chased it like lightning,
But when I turned to bring it back I saw a sight quite frightening.

I gripped my toy hard as I tried to comprehend
What it was I did wrong to make our relationship end.

You walked back to your car as I sat there still loyal.
Why am I subservient and you so royal?

Your engine started, and you peeled out of sight,
You didn't even care about my overwhelming fright.

As I sat in my pose determined you would come back,
The sun faded behind me while the surroundings turned black.

Day after day I stayed in that park,
Lying... waiting... too feeble to bark.

As I lay there dying thinking of you master,
I asked myself how I got into this horrifying disaster.

With my last breath of life, I whispered your name
Then I collapsed in a heap overrun by pain.

Why didn't you love me master? Why didn't you care?
Had I no significance, was I just a clump of hair?

I stayed there master and I waited for you
I guess taking care of me was just too much to do.

I'm gone now master, no more You-and-I
But what I can't figure out is why you didn't even say goodbye...

This post has been edited by WhiteDove: 18 January 2009 - 08:59 AM

[Bolshevik]

prior to the arrival of horses in North America, I believe the plains Indians used dogs to carry the load in their nomadic lifestyle. When the dog grew older and could no longer drag a teepee, they killed and ate it.

yes, dogs have some usefulness. Until technology replaces them.

[WhiteDove]

Bolshevik, on Jan 18 2009, 08:47 AM, said:

prior to the arrival of horses in North America, I believe the plains Indians used dogs to carry the load in their nomadic lifestyle. When the dog grew older and could no longer drag a teepee, they killed and ate it.

yes, dogs have some usefulness. Until technology replaces them.

You may be correct, sounds reasonable, but I'll note they killed it, doubtful they hooked it and drug it around needlessly alive torturing it. The Indians were pretty respectful of nature and creatures as I recall.

[mstar1]

What am I missing here?

Nobody that I know of ever wants to see animals abused. In my book its absolutely horrendous and inhuman.

What I really dont get is why WhiteDove goes out of his way to defend animals even in highly questionable stories but will dive through every conceivable loophole to pardon those who abuse humans.

Are you telling us that raped women are lower than dogs to you?
It sure looks at that way

[Bolshevik]

If someone were using a naked mole rat as shark bait, nobody would give a rats foot. Sticking a dog in a cage and poking it with sticks and laughing is abuse. Using one animal to catch another is a hunting technique. People are only disturbed because it is a dog or cat.

Dogs and cats are two animals that some humans put on pedestal above other animals. Which is why this story probably was fabricated in order to get attention.

[WhiteDove]

mstar1, on Jan 18 2009, 09:44 AM, said:

What am I missing here?

Let me guess The truth maybe?

Nobody that I know of ever wants to see animals abused. In my book its absolutely horrendous and inhuman.

What I really dont get is why WhiteDove goes out of his way to defend animals even in highly questionable stories but will dive through every conceivable loophole to pardon those who abuse humans.

Are you telling us that raped women are lower than dogs to you?
It sure looks at that way

First you assume the story is highly questionable that of course is your right ,however the facts of the case clearly show otherwise. There are none ,zero that show the case to be questionable. All of the officials and others as well are in agreement that it happened. Only George and a few others here have decided without any factual evidence presented, only speculation and theories just because they think thats not the way it happened are in disagreement. The official record agrees it happened and the party was sentanced.

Let me refresh your memory.........

QUOTE
Quote Snopes ....Based on a Reunion newspaper article which acknowledged the practice and reported the recent prosecution of a deliveryman on that island over animal cruelty charges associated with the described activity, We'd have to say that there is some truth to the shark fishing claim........



QUOTE
The French Embassy in Washington D.C. has also maintained that although the practice is not unknown its occurrence is not as prevalent as recent news reports have made it seem


In your letter that you referenced


QUOTE
Quote "We would like to emphasize that the practice of using live dogs or cats as shark bait is exceptional and isolated It was never widespread nor traditional but intruduced by ruthless individuals."


Introduced meaning that it did in fact go on...case closed


QUOTE
" The facts that elicited your complaint are the act of a few isolated individual parties that are being sought after by police and will be brought to justice."

Now that that is out of the way part two of your assumption.

Quote

What I really don't get is why WhiteDove goes out of his way to defend animals even in highly questionable stories but will dive through every conceivable loophole to pardon those who abuse humans.

As in the case of the dog, factual evidence is paramount to the truth. I have neither pardoned or condemned anyone in the case of abuse of humans. I have found lacking any evidence. Not verbal testimony undocumented by facts. As such it neither validates the claim or invalidates the claim .It is insufficient evidence to make a determination either way .It comes down to he said she said. As such I am not willing to make a judgment on a person for such a serious crime based on non documentable words. Some may choose to based on feeling or emotion, anger or other motives that's their right I suppose. but hopefully they will never serve on a jury with that premise. Again your accusation is unfounded I have made no such determination of pardon.

This post has been edited by WhiteDove: 18 January 2009 - 02:43 PM

[WhiteDove]

[quote name='Bolshevik' date='Jan 18 2009, 11:23 AM' post='452895']
If someone were using a naked mole rat as shark bait, nobody would give a rats foot.

I would...

Sticking a dog in a cage and poking it with sticks and laughing is abuse.

Yes it is ! Your point?? So is sticking a hook in its mouth and paws when alive, and dragging it through the water.

Using one animal to catch another is a hunting technique. People are only disturbed because it is a dog or cat.

It may be a huunting technique to some ,but it is illegal none the less among normal humans. That might be why the man was convicted despite his hunting technique DUH.....

Dogs and cats are two animals that some humans put on pedestal above other animals. Which is why this story probably was fabricated in order to get attention.

Dogs and cats being put on a pedistal do not change factual record.
Do you have have some evidence for your claim of fabrication? I thought not....
Otherwise we'll just stick with the factual record of the court case.

This post has been edited by WhiteDove: 18 January 2009 - 02:54 PM

[mstar1]

Quote

Again your accusation is unfounded I have made no such determination of pardon.

Sure you have, you've done it several times. We have had first hand accounts right here which you've fought tooth and nail (and danced like a whirling dervish) to negate

You even started a thread a while back attempting to make a hero out of a man who was convicted TWICE of a triple homicide - including shooting a grandmother 5 times at close range, who has never been exonerated of his crimes, that you claimed was innocent based on a song

I ve read your (very selective) moral outrage concerning the abuse of dogs and animals, but little concern when it comes to the well being of humans --especially those that are victims of violent crimes.

Its extremely weird and more than a little bit creepy to me---I dont want to see a dog with a hook through his mouth either, but I cant understand why that would seemingly perturb you but rape and murder dont---

[WhiteDove]

[quote name='mstar1' date='Jan 18 2009, 02:47 PM' post='452933']
Sure you have, you've done it several times. We have had first hand accounts right here which you've fought tooth and nail (and danced like a whirling dervish) to negate

First hand accounts are disputable ask any law enforcement officer , they must be tempered with facts. Each party will have their own first hand story. rarely does one coincide with another. Evidence helps in determining which is truthful. we have no factual evidence to compare with the testimony as such it is simply flip a coin , I believe so and so. Testimony is always challenged in a court of law when convicting one of crime and tempered with hard evidence, none has been provided in the internet court here.

You even started a thread a while back attempting to make a hero out of a man who was convicted TWICE of a triple homicide - including shooting a grandmother 5 times at close range, who has never been exonerated of his crimes, that you claimed was innocent based on a song

Well he is out of jail Yes? based on non factual records I guess someone agrees.

I 've read your (very selective) moral outrage concerning the abuse of dogs and animals, but little concern when it comes to the well being of humans --especially those that are victims of violent crimes.

When there is factual record such as in this case to make proper judgment with then I can have concern until then it is speculation.

[cheranne]

or

[GarthP2000]

Quote

I have neither pardoned or condemned anyone in the case of abuse of humans. I have found lacking any evidence. Not verbal testimony undocumented by facts. As such it neither validates the claim or invalidates the claim .It is insufficient evidence to make a determination either way .It comes down to he said she said. As such I am not willing to make a judgment on a person for such a serious crime based on non documentable words. Some may choose to based on feeling or emotion, anger or other motives that's their right I suppose. but hopefully they will never serve on a jury with that premise. Again your accusation is unfounded I have made no such determination of pardon.

And speaking of juries and persons in related areas (ie., lawyers, judges, and the like), in many (if not all) of the cases/situations of the alleged rapes/sexual abuses in TWI (since you and I know that is what we all here are alluding to), verbal/visual witnesses (mainly the victims themselves) _have been_ regarded as valid and 'documentable' sources that have been validated claims, enough to make a conviction stand. You show any lawyer/prosecuting attorney all the verbal/eye witnesses illustrated here on Greasespot, and ask them if they have a solid enough case to present to a jury, and I'd be willing to bet even $$$money$$$ that _all_ of them would respond with a resounding "Yes!"

You, on the other hand, have failed _miserably_ to prove to any of us here why all the claims of rape/sexual abuse are without merit (and not meeting the legal standard of proof), your claims of them "not being backed up by facts" notwithstanding. ... Totally. Hell, and I'm not even an attorney. (Are you?) But I do know, that if I were sitting on a jury of my peers, and I was presented the testimony presented here on GS, I would convict. ... in a heartbeat.