Monday, September 27, 2010



posted by   |  permalink  |  17 comments  | iconforum  |icon subscribe  |icon comment rss 

17 comments:

Blogger ItsATragedy  |  9/28/2010 2:58 PM  |  Flag  
Perhaps you would be interested in background on Patricia Khuly, alleged veterinarian.

Patricia Khuly is involved with the breeder lobbying world. She has long been producing propaganda for, in particular, the AKC breeder lobbying world.

That is what her column is- pure propaganda for breeder financial interests as she abuses her DVM and tries to pretend expert status.

Khuly is heavily involved with an AKC breeder and former AKC writer and lobbyist named Gina Spadafori, who poses as a "reporter" and "writer" and produces AKC breeder propaganda in league with AKC breeder and lobbyist Christie Keith (her fellow fake "reporter" who writes a pretend pet column for the San Francisco Chronicle that is nothing more than AKC propaganda.)

Their breeder propaganda business is called Pet Connection.

This is how the breeding industry has infiltrated the media. It's like, as someone pointed out elsewhere, having a tobacco company lobbyist write general health columns for the local newspaper.

Patricia Khuly is representing the money interests of pit bull breeders with this article, in particular the AKC Staffordshire Terrier (pit bull) breeders.

She is participating in the coverup of the deadly problems that pit bulls have so that her associates in the AKC and elsewhere can continue to profit from pit bulls without regulation.

The real crime here is that a newspaper is allowing a business industry lobbyist to abuse the public by pretending to give expert information that is simply public relations propaganda for breeders, in particular breeders that produce dogs who kill people.

Financial interests of breeders, of course, conflict with public safety and other issues. A newspaper or media source is acting unethically by allowing a lobbyist from that industry to abuse the public's trust.

In this case, this abuse of trust may well lead to death or serious injury.

Blogger ItsATragedy  |  9/28/2010 3:22 PM  |  Flag  
"U.S. Shelters That Euthanize are just like Psychopathic Bosnian Teens Who Throw 6 Week Old Puppies into a River on Videotape"

When the AKC and their lobbyist Rick Berman decided to use Nathan Winograd as their mouthpiece to avoid regulation and attack animal control that investigates abusive breeders and puppy mills (with lots of fake outrage and blame about euthanasia,) Spadafori, Khuly, and Keith went on an AKC fueled public relations campaign for Winograd No Kill, as directed by Rick Berman and Berman's organization Center For Consumer Freedom, which also is connected to AKC board member Patti Strand and her breeder lobbying group NAIA and PetPac.

(Berman represents especially the puppy mill interests of AKC, and the "show dog breeders" or fanciers need puppy mill registration income to pursue their activities. That's part of why breeders oppose all kinds of regulation as it interferes with profits and income like this.)

For more background on this read http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Kennel_Club

For more background on why the AKC breeder lobbyists promote Nathan Winograd No Kill and attack animal control with fake outrage about euthanasia, see http://www.petpaccorruption.com/web-of-corruption/ and
http://workingtohelpanimalstodaytomorrow.blogspot.com/2009/08/part-1-judie-mancusco-vs-scum.html

These breeder lobbyists all work with each other.

As far as pit bulls go, pit bulls are and always have been bred to be fighting dogs. The breeder lobbyists try to concoct new "reasons" to breed and use pit bulls that they hope that a naive public will accept so the naive public does not demand laws regulating these fighting breeds.

(Remember reading about how tobacco companies some decades ago tried to claim that smoking helped cure asthma? They hired doctors, MDS, to make these claims in ads, magazine, and newspaper articles.)

Blogger ItsATragedy  |  9/28/2010 3:25 PM  |  Flag  
What kind of therapy was Khuly claiming she needed?

Is this affecting her performance and judgment as a veterinarian?

Should her state licensing board be aware of this?

Blogger Bagheera Kiplingi  |  9/28/2010 3:27 PM  |  Flag  
Thanks for addressing this topic, it is long overdue. I hope the cities struggling with this issue take note and work to pass laws that require real certification and stiff penalties for those who violate them.
And I hope the state of Florida will look into Dr Khuly.

Blogger ItsATragedy  |  9/28/2010 3:33 PM  |  Flag  
There is an individual at USAToday with an affiliation with Patti Strand, the AKC board member who runs the breeder lobbying group NAIA

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Patti_Strand

This is how Khuly was hired by USAToday, through her affiliations with the AKC.

It is likely that the publisher does not realize that they were hoodwinked.

Blogger ItsATragedy  |  9/28/2010 3:37 PM  |  Flag  
It was up to "reporter" Jomay Steen to do her research and homework and figure out she was being conned.

Instead, we got more propaganda, more falsehoods, as Jomay Steen puts the public in danger.

Blogger ItsATragedy  |  9/28/2010 3:53 PM  |  Flag  
As these scammers attempt to force their fighting breeds into rental housing and public areas like restaurants, they are of course not realizing the key problem.

Many landlords and business owners do not allow pets on their premises because many tenants and customers have deathly allergies to animals!

People, and these include a large number of children, have been directed by doctors to stay away from animals and not to live in a building or area with animals. With the higher allergy and asthma rate, people like Khuly and Melissa Merrill are putting people's lives at risk not only with their fighting breed pit bulls, but also through instigating potentially deadly allergic reactions to their dogs.

Forcing other tenants and customers to inhale the dander and allergans that these dogs spread about through an entire building and ventilation system is criminal, and the law needs to protect the huge population of truly disabled people with animal allergies.

Even if the buildings are separate, the allergans are spread throughout driveway, garage, walkway, garden, yard, play areas.

People who have been affected by a fellow tenants pit bulls need to see remedial relief from the courts for the damage that these dog owners have caused.

No child should be forced to endure asthma attacks because a scammer is using the service dog loophole to force pit bulls into their residence.

It will be especially poor children who suffer because of the Khulys and Merrills.

Blogger cravendesires  |  9/28/2010 5:04 PM  |  Flag  
i am so glad you covered this! i saw this story about melissa merrill and i didn't have time to address it. there are many holes in her story.

1) that is quite a stretch calling the short coated brindle "service dog" a gsd mix.

2) merrill claims that 98% of the landlords turn her away, yet she is homeless. what about the other 2%? are pit nutters really this stupid or do they just makes this BS up as they go?

3) IF she has a disability and IF her dogs are in fact trained service dogs and IF they can not deny housing, why isn't she presenting these tags? why is still lying about her dogs?

4) who needs TWO service dogs? who in their right mind would believe the applicant was telling the truth about their dogs when they claim to need 2 of them because one of them needs to be awake. HUH?

5) who in their right mind would come to her aid with those 2 dogs guarding her? i would not help this woman if she was on fire with those 2 pits sitting next to her. i don't remember where it was but recently a woman had a heart attack while on a walk with her dog. her pit bull needed to be tasered to render assistance.

and this freaky vet, wow... i poked around her blog and i have to wonder if she is in the online advice business because she can't cut it in the real world. in addition to being unethical, she is arrogant and condescending.

OpenID truthbird  |  9/28/2010 5:46 PM  |  Flag  
What an idiot! She tries to compare gun laws to pit bull laws in an April piece. Guess what Missy?

PIT BULLS ARE NOT PROTECTED BY THE SECOND AMENDMENT OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION NOR ARE THEY PROTECTED BY ANY PART OF THE CONSTITUTION.

Zip. Zero. No protection!

http://www.usatoday.com/life/lifestyle/pets/2010-04-16-vetviews16_N.htm

Blogger ItsATragedy  |  9/28/2010 7:36 PM  |  Flag  
"i poked around her blog and i have to wonder if she is in the online advice business because she can't cut it in the real world. in addition to being unethical, she is arrogant and condescending."

I believe that you have had a taste of the AKC breeder world.

I cannot tell you how sociopathic the AKC breeder contingent is, and they are a reflection of the other subsets of the breeder lobby.

These people are filled with hatred and antipathy toward nearly everyone. They only care about their obsessive breeding interests, and many of these breeders are actually mentally disturbed.

If you read their breeder boards for any length of time, the hatred, anger, and arrogance is overwhelming. Even most children have more self-control and intelligence.

The attitude of these breeders is that they are special, they should be able to do whatever they want without any kind of law-abiding expectation, and that they have some sort of special abilities that the world should worship. There is no empathy for other humans or animals whatsoever.

Anyone that is perceived as a threat to this fairy tale world is attacked rather violently, and the gang piles on like a pack of, well, pit bulls.

The carelessness and lack of concern about killed and mauled human beings is chilling. As usual, at the heart of such obsessive behavior is money, because most of them do not obey the laws of our country and pay their taxes on their breeding business income. They believe they are above the law, in just about every way. Antisocial attitudes and behavior prevail in every way.

The question is, why would any respectable media source want to be associated with this marginal and abnormal cult-like group?

Blogger ItsATragedy  |  9/29/2010 1:44 AM  |  Flag  
"She tries to compare gun laws to pit bull laws in an April piece. Guess what Missy?

PIT BULLS ARE NOT PROTECTED BY THE SECOND AMENDMENT OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION NOR ARE THEY PROTECTED BY ANY PART OF THE CONSTITUTION"



Again, this comes from the AKC, and related breeder lobbies.

They will also bray about their "constitutional rights" to do whatever they want, from breeding aggressive fighting breeds to running puppy mills. (Senseless, of course)

The AKC has declared that dogs are "property" and that no one may make any laws over their "property" therefore breeders may do as they like unrestricted by any laws.

Of course, this makes no sense whatsoever in a country of laws where laws about property are rampant, and it also holds these breeders accountable for their "defective property" ie dogs specifically bred to be dangerous that kill.

But that doesn't stop this selfish declaration of special status by breeders.

The AKC holds "Legislative Empowerment" seminars where they teach breeders and other dog owners how to oppose legislation and regulations. This consists of creating the same myths, lies, fabrications, and propaganda that you see here with this pit bull service dog scam.

They also use "Legislative Liaisons" from their ranks to orchestrate propaganda campaigns within communities, such as with the media and legislators, to oppose regulation.

One other pit bull related example has been to approach the media with ridiculous tales of pit bulls that "visit nursing homes" in an attempt to get sympathy to oppose regulation of pit bulls and claim another false kind of service by pit bulls. (Of course, the insurance held by nursing homes does not cover pit bulls, and the danger is immense)

Some of these Legislative Liaisons have even brought pit bulls illegally to schools to try to indoctrinate children with propaganda, without mentioning of course that pit bulls are the top killer and attacker of kids.

They will attempt anything to oppose regulation of dog breeds and breeding. It's emotional manipulation. It's outright deception.

They do not care about the innocent public suffering the consequences of their breeding activities.

Blogger BB  |  9/29/2010 3:35 PM  |  Flag  
The ranks of "therapy" (not service) dogs are about to swell mightily with pit bulls. Soon after, there will be a rash of attacks involving "therapy" pit bulls. Following will be an overhaul of the "therapy dog" industry and it will be lot harder for these two-bit organizations to hand out credentials for cash. The public will also come to understand a little better how dangerous these dogs really are - it will be harder to blame "attack training" and "poor socialization" when the dog has been "therapy certified", won't it?

Maybe the end justifies the means?

Blogger Dark  |  9/30/2010 2:46 AM  |  Flag  
BB, if that didn't mean that innocent people, such as school children and the elderly, would be the ones paying the price for the fraud, I'd agree with you. As it is, I sincerely hope that lawmakers quickly see this loophole for what it is and shut it proactively rather than reactively.

Blogger BB  |  10/01/2010 11:58 PM  |  Flag  
James Grieble declared his pit bull a service dog and attempted to take it to his son's elementary school, where the dog "was observed chasing children while she was leashed...and James made a threat to set her loose on the custodian". Presumably this threat was made when he was asked to remove the uncertified dog from the school grounds.

http://www.ktnv.com/Global/story.asp?S=13255660

Blogger Dorothea Malm  |  10/03/2010 3:19 PM  |  Flag  
Wow BB, this story is so frightening and so well illustrates the problem fake service dogs are causing.
The school did NOT know their rights or the rights of the person in the wheel chair.
If they had simply known to tell the man that he must get his service dog under control immediately or remove it. And that would be the end of their problem.
Instead they request certification...which is not required.
As for the man with the disability, he stated that the dog pulls his wheelchair. That is NOT a trained behavior that would qualify the dog as a service dog under the ADA.
Obviously, the dog is marginally obedience trained by pet standards. It does not come near to the obedience training required of a service dog which requires that the dog not solicit attention from other people when "working."
The owner of the pit bull obviously was completely unaware of the ADA requirements either. Proffering a note from a doctor almost proves his dog is a fraud.
To think of the dangers this guy is blithely subjecting those children to...it is sickening. And to think that if he is truly disabled, and putting his safety and well-being in the paws of a barely trained pit bull puppy that just pulls him down the street, well, the guys crazy.
On the service dog central board, one of the members says the wife contacted her admitting that the dog became aggressive, and excusing it. The member replied that a service dog should never become aggessive under any circumstances.
http://servicedogcentral.org/forum/index.php/topic,10592.0.html

Blogger Jaloney  |  1/12/2013 1:08 AM  |  Flag  
I ran into a fake pitbull service dog (supposedly in training) in the hall of a busy hospital. I reported it to the hospital administrators and security at St. Mary's Hospital in Grand Rapids Michigan. They did nothing.

Blogger Kirsten  |  1/14/2013 1:21 PM  |  Flag  
There are several factual errors in this article regarding disability rights laws.

1. The ADA is a civil law, not a criminal law. One cannot commit a "crime" for violating a civil law. Civil laws are enforced by courts, not authorities. To get enforcement, the aggrieved party must sue the party that infringed on their civil rights.

2. Some (but not all) states do have criminal laws on the books for falsely claiming a dog is a service dog. I worked in my state to get such a law passed. In my state, the penalty is $1000 and/or 6 months in jail for the human and of course euthanasia of the dog if it is of a banned breed.

3. The ADA does not generally apply to housing unless that housing belongs to a state or local government. The correct law to cite is the Fair Housing Amendments Act (FHAA), which, again, is a civil, not criminal law. The FHAA actually does permit landlords to exclude dogs, even service dogs, based on breed in certain specific situations. See HUD's official memo on this topic here: http://servicedogcentral.org/content/files/2006-06-12%20HUD%20memo%20on%20insurance%20policy%20restrictions%20related%20to%20reasonable%20accommodations.PDF

4. Changes in the definition of "service animal" under 28 CFR 36.104 did not make it possible to use a pitbull as a service dog or to falsely claim a pet pitbull was a service dog. That had already been the case since 1990 when the ADA first became law. All the Department of Justice did was respond to requests to put breed restrictions into the regulation at the same time they were putting in species restrictions, by explaining why they refused to do.

Post a Comment »

archives: