Everything HSUS and PETA…Animal Rights Extremists at Their finest and that ain’t much…
from HumaneWatch:
http://www.humanewatch.org/humane-society-of-the-u-s-racketeering-payment-5-7-million/
We solved a little mystery about the $15.75 million settlement in May of a federal racketeering and bribery lawsuit against the Humane Society of the United States and other activists. When the settlement was announced, HSUS declined to say how much it paid. Now we know: HSUS and its affiliate the Fund for Animals paid nearly $6 million, according to their consolidated financial statement.
On its tax return for 2013, HSUS declares $4.4 million in settlement expenses and the Fund for Animals declares $1.2 million—making up almost all of the $5.675 million settlement. Amusingly, the vast majority of the settlement is characterized as a “program” expense—but somehow we don’t think it will make it into HSUS’s next annual report.
This is donor money—HSUS’s insurance provider denied HSUS coverage for the litigation. That’s a fact HSUS danced around and omitted when it commented on the settlement, saying things like it expected insurance would cover most of all of the settlement and “in the end, that no donor dollars from the HSUS will go to Feld [Entertainment],” the plaintiff. Considering the settlement was paid in May, donor dollars already went to pay the racketeering settlement.
Fortunately, HSUS didn’t escape scrutiny from third parties. In fact, Charity Navigator yanked its rating of HSUS and replaced it with a “Donor Advisory” to the public. HSUS can pay a witness, but it can’t buy itself out of that jam.
______________________
What you may have missed:
http://www.agcouncil.com/oklahoma-subpoenas-latest-disaster-for-hsus/
Oklahoma Subpoenas are Latest Disaster for HSUS
As if things weren’t bad enough for the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt now has issued subpoenas to HSUS as part of his office’s ongoing inquiry into the organization’s fundraising practices, according to Humanewatch.org.
The animal rights watchdog website reported that Pruitt shared the news on a recent broadcast of “All Around Oklahoma Agriculture.” He reportedly told listeners that his office met with HSUS representatives after news broke that the huge direct-mail firm that HSUS uses to solicit donations had reached a $25 million settlement with the New York Attorney General for deceptive charitable fundraising in another case. Pruitt said the reaction of HSUS leaders to the meeting was “in some respects, not good…there’s been denial.”
In the New York case, nearly all of the funds raised for a disabled veterans charity were sent back to the fundraising firm as payment for the campaign. The New York Attorney General’s office described the settlement as “the largest amount of financial relief ever obtained for deceptive charitable fundraising.”
The Humanewatch.org article quoted Pruitt as saying, “Someone can sit across a table and say, ‘We’re doing it the right way,’ but when you raise literally hundreds of millions of dollars, and all that we see so far is less than one percent of those monies going into what would be considered local shelters, it is a very fair and right question to ask this organization nationally, are they being deceptive and unfair in their communications? We intend to push that issue, we intend to find out, and if in fact they are engaging in what we consider deceptive practices, we will bring enforcement actions…and seek to recover damages.”
Pruitt also said he has been in contact with other state attorneys general. “We’ve talked about this on a national basis…I don’t have concrete information about their involvement but we are talking about that.”
A rash of Attorney General investigations nationwide would be HSUS’ worst nightmare, especially coming on the heels of several other financial and PR disasters, including:
- The $15.75 million settlement HSUS and other co-defendants agreed to pay to end the federal racketeering case brought against them by Feld Entertainment;
- HSUS’ insurance carrier’s refusal to cover the cost of the Feld litigation, leaving HSUS donors to foot the entire bill (something HSUS lied about in its initial public statements regarding the settlement);
- Charity Navigator’s issuance of a “Donor Advisory” against HSUS, indicating “extreme concern” that funds donated to the organization might not be used for the purposes intended by the donor;
- A $20 million dollar drop in contributions in 2013, according to HSUS’ latest fundraising report;
- The embarrassing failure of a June HSUS fundraiser near Capitol Hill, which drew an estimated 35 people, and came on the heels of a Washington DC “lobby day” held while Congress was in recess;
- Exposure of HSUS’ funneling of millions of dollars in donor funds into “investments in the Cayman Islands” instead of directing those funds to shelters or other programs that directly benefit animals.
Given these recent and high-profile failures, one thing is certain. Elected officials, donors and the media are beginning to see HSUS for what it really is: an organization that pretends to be about animal welfare while it pursues a not-very-well-hidden agenda of deception, greed and corruption.
As President Lincoln once said, “You can fool some of the people some of the time, but you can’t fool all of the people all of the time.” HSUS, are you listening?
______________________
from the Center for Consumer Freedom:
The Nastiest PETA Ad Ever?
Last month, we shared a compilation of the top ten most offensive and misleading ads produced by the deceptively named People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA). But it looks like we spoke too soon: The self-proclaimed press sluts have topped themselves—or, perhaps more accurately, stooped to a new low.
PETA installed a new U.K. billboard featuring a surprised-looking woman splashed with white fluids. The advertisement—captioned “Some Bodily Fluids are Bad for You” with the fine print “Ditch Dairy. Go Vegan.”—is a far-from-subtle reference to a sex act, a tasteless reference purportedly designed to encourage a vegan diet. (You can view it at this link—if you really want to—but as you may have guessed it isn’t safe for work or children.)
However, as you might expect, most members of the community just couldn’t swallow the outrageously inappropriately ad. Amid protests, the ad was taken down.
In a blog post celebrating the campaign, PETA explained: “We love finding cheeky ways to grab people’s attention for animals, and our latest billboard is certainly going to stop passers-by!” But so far, it looks like people are only paying attention to PETA’s outrageously offensive tactics.
We think it’s pretty safe to say that the billboard has prompted more conversations about the rights of women instead of the rights of animals. As one advocacy group explains: “PETA’s sexist, misogynist adverts aim to be original and thought-provoking but they are neither.”
Given that the group has flippantly referenced mental illness and female obesity in other publicity stunts, it should probably come as no surprise that PETA is breezily dismissing its depiction of sexual degradation as just another “cheeky” media grab.
Forget dairy. Let’s hope this offensive press stunt persuades people to ditch PETA.
___________________________
Disclaimer connected to this blog…Things said are of my opinion and the opinions of others…Stay tuned -B
Top Cats Roar... 
Its not just the HSUS and PETA that misappropriate funds………any rescue organization that has a founder and primary players in the ‘rescue’ who do not work in jobs outside of rescue (and this is factoring in that the founders are not anywhere close to being wealthy and don’t need to work, and what was their status in terms of income and rescuing for the previous 5 years of doing rescue), are always asking for donations both big and small, they keep taking in more and more animals, but the numbers coming in don’t match up to the animals being adopted or “put down” (and swindler rescues who are primarily donation-funded and adoption-based COUNT on the fact people will not ask them questions of “where are all of the animals you have rescued in the past year?” because they know most people don’t really want to know where they went and like to relive the help they gave during the “crisis rescue” that is oh-so-dramatic and adrenalin-pumping), and many of the swindler rescues team up with other rescues who are just like them and then they go on the attack on other rescues to try and “take-out” their competition for donations, followers, etc.
I guess we can’t blame them for running their scams and cons because THAT is what they are; con-artists and swindlers, and that is exactly what these types of people do to make money, get their 15 minutes of fame, etc (fact checking would expose them for all that they are NOT, but they KNOW that most people won’t bother with it, so “its all good” as the saying goes), so it is ingrained in them to embellish, lie, cheat, charm people so that if they need “back-up” they have it in their naïve and passive followers who don’t ask questions, and they are great at complimenting people and telling them how “wonderful and awesome” they are for donating, when all the while they are laughing behind the scenes at how stupid their “marks” are…….. and just watch what happens when the faucet of donations from someone runs dry they drop them like a red hot potato.
However, rather than being like sheep being led to the slaughter (especially if they are a part of a mob that libeled and defamed someone or something on behalf of information the swindler rescue put out there, they should not be surprised when they are involved in a civil suit in court where their pleas of “I didn’t know” will go over with the judge like a lead balloon) people that are intelligent can fact check, connect the dots on a timeline, ask to see where all of the money in donations is going, ask where ALL of the animals the rescue has rescued using donation money from a designated fundraiser in the past 2 years have gone, ask to see a resume for the founder so that information contained in the resume can be fact checked, (and there are some really amazing fact checking programs and sites out there that are inexpensive to use), what is the physical address of the publically-oriented donation-funded adoption-based rescue (and it is startling how many o these types of rescues who always want the publics money refuse to post the physical address for their property…..some even say they have an “open door policy”, when what it appears they really have is a “gimme, gimme, gimme more FREE money open palm policy”), ask how long the rescue has been in existence (when were they founded), when did they file with the state as a “not-for-profit” entity, when did they file with the IRS as a 501c3 tax exempt organization, etc.
In the end, saying “I didn’t know” in regard to their support of a primarily donation-funded, adoption-based ‘rescue’ will not help people in a court of law where facts and proof will win out most of the time far more than the posers game of embellishing, lying, telling tall tales, and pleading ignorance, because as we all are taught, “ignorance of the law is no excuse”
You always manage to hit the nail on the head.