This will end the hobby: AMENDMENTS TO LACEY ACT IN HOUSE COMPETES ACT HR4521
- Thread starter ThRoewer
- Start date
- Tagged users None
There is no specific exclusion in the bill for dogs/cats. Again the bill is little more than one page and an easy read......
The bill does specify this applies to "wild mammals" so some may be making a reasonable assumption that dogs and cats would be considered domesticated animals and not wild animals. However that assumption would also imply an exclusion for most common mammals in the pet trade(hamsters, guinea pigs, etc), livestock animals(cows, goats,etc), and work animals(horses, donkeys, etc)
Cnidariaphile
New Member
We need to be clear who is behind this. It is not Snorkel Bob or PETA, etc, although I’m sure they are very supportive. It was put forth from the Federal Government, FWS. Having worked for multiple government agencies involved with nature (being intentionally vague here) I can tell you that these people are rabid ideologues. If you are under the impression that they are neutral, as they should be being federal, you are quite mistaken. They absolutely want to shut down all animal trades. There are occasionally some fair minded people, but they don’t call the shots and don’t get promoted to positions where they can. Only the ideologues do. If you only knew of the dirty tactics that go on behind the scenes it would disturb you. They don’t care whose lives they ruin because they operate through a religious fervor. Government (ie control) and the “Environment” are their gods.
Those of you that think “well I’m sure they have the best intentions” are incredibly naive. Those that say “move along, nothing to see here folks” are either what Karl Marx called “useful idiots” or they might be Feds on here and other forums to keep people calm as part of a Psy Ops effort. They want to keep enough people lulled to sleep so they don’t generate sufficient resistance. Probably half of you think that is me being paranoid. The other half knows that that is exactly a tactic they would use. And they DO. Just like the tactic of slipping it in at the eleventh hour in a bill that has nothing to do with the issue. If you are struggling to interpret the wording of the amendment, guess what? That is a tactic as well. Apparently the vagueness has worked on some of you. Keep whistling past the graveyard. The vagueness should be a huge red flag to anyone not on Xanax or a frequent consumer of network television.
The ability to label anything they want as “injurious” is the most disturbing. The “let’s give our benevolent overloads the benefit of the doubt” crowd may be shocked to learn that they have labeled Newts and Salamanders as “injurious”. Why? Because some sals have been found to carry a fungal disease in the wild in other countries. No sals or newts will EVER come into this country legally again, ever, period, because they might, MIGHT, carry a disease. Of course you can test incoming shipments for the disease to determine if they are safe, but that is not the point. I’ll let you guess what the actual point is. They used salamanders as a test to see if they could get away with it. And they did because the salamander hobby here is so small that hardly anyone noticed or cared. Now with the PRECEDENT set, they can go after bigger fish. Literally. Can you think of any other animals that MIGHT carry a disease? Yep. All of them.
(I’m reposting this because it took so long for mods to approve that it got buried. Mods can delete the original)
Those of you that think “well I’m sure they have the best intentions” are incredibly naive. Those that say “move along, nothing to see here folks” are either what Karl Marx called “useful idiots” or they might be Feds on here and other forums to keep people calm as part of a Psy Ops effort. They want to keep enough people lulled to sleep so they don’t generate sufficient resistance. Probably half of you think that is me being paranoid. The other half knows that that is exactly a tactic they would use. And they DO. Just like the tactic of slipping it in at the eleventh hour in a bill that has nothing to do with the issue. If you are struggling to interpret the wording of the amendment, guess what? That is a tactic as well. Apparently the vagueness has worked on some of you. Keep whistling past the graveyard. The vagueness should be a huge red flag to anyone not on Xanax or a frequent consumer of network television.
The ability to label anything they want as “injurious” is the most disturbing. The “let’s give our benevolent overloads the benefit of the doubt” crowd may be shocked to learn that they have labeled Newts and Salamanders as “injurious”. Why? Because some sals have been found to carry a fungal disease in the wild in other countries. No sals or newts will EVER come into this country legally again, ever, period, because they might, MIGHT, carry a disease. Of course you can test incoming shipments for the disease to determine if they are safe, but that is not the point. I’ll let you guess what the actual point is. They used salamanders as a test to see if they could get away with it. And they did because the salamander hobby here is so small that hardly anyone noticed or cared. Now with the PRECEDENT set, they can go after bigger fish. Literally. Can you think of any other animals that MIGHT carry a disease? Yep. All of them.
(I’m reposting this because it took so long for mods to approve that it got buried. Mods can delete the original)
Ahh yes, the infamous random new user with information about the deep state. That'll help sell it.
“Those of you that think “well I’m sure they have the best intentions” are incredibly naive. Those that say “move along, nothing to see here folks” are either what Karl Marx called “useful idiots” or they might be Feds on here and other forums to keep people calm as part of a Psy Ops effort.”
This from the above is in poor taste. I work for a public affairs/comms/PR firm so am well versed in the way things work on the Hill and in our political world, but I would never ever directly refer to the public in that way or go off the deep end about “psy ops.” Firms like mine are hired by opposing interest groups to rally the public and make a big stink, and if that works the other side will hire a firm to hone public messaging and combat the resistance. It’s not psy ops, and that kind of thing is just unnecessary to say/borders on (is) conspiracy theory.
Honestly, as someone who works in comms/advertising and creative, “psy ops” is insulting. But it’s not surprising b/c a lot of folks seem to think we’re out there doing some sort of nefarious mind control.
This from the above is in poor taste. I work for a public affairs/comms/PR firm so am well versed in the way things work on the Hill and in our political world, but I would never ever directly refer to the public in that way or go off the deep end about “psy ops.” Firms like mine are hired by opposing interest groups to rally the public and make a big stink, and if that works the other side will hire a firm to hone public messaging and combat the resistance. It’s not psy ops, and that kind of thing is just unnecessary to say/borders on (is) conspiracy theory.
Honestly, as someone who works in comms/advertising and creative, “psy ops” is insulting. But it’s not surprising b/c a lot of folks seem to think we’re out there doing some sort of nefarious mind control.
Last edited:
MaxTremors
2500 Club Member
Stopped reading at ‘Karl Marx’. Actually, I didn’t, I kept reading assuming it would just go further off the deep end, and it went full on Mariana Trench.
What I don't get is that apparently a mod approved his post.
I was giggling to myself at the thought of FWS big wigs waging a psy ops war on R2R.
But, hey, some conspiracy theories turn out to be true, like MK Uktra. That said, this is not Cold War stuff, it’s a very typical thing, and I see stuff like it at work every day — our client could be a government agency, nonprofit, or an association just like the one opposing this, and we’d help launch a campaign that would target key audiences both in the public and lawmakers. That is just the reality of how this kind of thing works.
Last edited:
damsels are not mean
Valuable Member
The federal government wrote this bill himself
Acros
Valuable Member
How can I believe anything you say with that username???
MnFish1
10K Club member
I think were talking across each other. If there is one species that has the potential to be injurious in all 50 states its Koi and Goldfish. So - you're right - and its why I asked - what is the purpose of this bill?
MnFish1
10K Club member
The amendment is 1 page the bill is multiple pages. And putting the 2 together IMHO - is not 'easy'. Its extremely poorly written. You might be totally correct - but saying others with a different position - taking into account the way its written might be a mistake
Cnidariaphile
New Member
Although I’m a “new member” it’s likely I have been reefing longer than you have been alive. I avoid forums, like most old timers. This is the first time I felt an obligation to post something because the situation is that serious. So I just registered to post what I did (but I have lurked on here occasionally over the years).
We are not talking about “the Deep State”. They are completely in the open. They are called the Fish and Wildlife Service
Last edited:
Cnidariaphile
New Member
I
Im sorry if invoking his name was a trigger word for you that immediately shut down rational thought. I apologize for the limbic hijacking. I needed to say where the term came from to give context so it did not appear as though I was calling anyone an idiot directly. That is not my intention.
Cnidariaphile
New Member
I suppose Psy Ops was too strong a word. We can call it misinformation/disinformation. You do realize that governments do utilize that, right? Wouldn’t it make sense, if you were were trying to shut down a particular group with a piece of legislation that you would go that groups most popular site and tell them “pay no attention to the man behind the curtain”? “The bill does not mean what you suspect it might” because it is intentionally written to sound benign enough, but then left open to “interpretation”.
Last edited:
N.Sreefer
Valuable Member
So the USA has enough funding in the FWS to run a psy ops outfit? Here in canada they cant even afford to hire new officers and enforce what laws are already in place. So when does the U.S FWS get their new m1a2 abrams and f22s?
It’s illegal for the federal government to do psy ops against Americans, and it is a military thing so it doesn’t just come from anyone.
ive explained what I do, and if you still want to insist that it’s misinformation/disinformation to aid the federal government in illegal overreach, or that there are some deep state internal processes outside of public affairs and comms messaging developed by comms professionals then believe what you want b/c there’s nothing more I can say to make reality more clear.
Edit: just making it clear that I have not taken a position on how I feel about this amendment in question or the way it is written, nor will I in this thread. Sign the petition if you are so inclined, or don’t. Any assumption about what I am thinking about it is just an assumption.
Last edited:
Cnidariaphile
New Member
while reefers have large enough numbers to make enough noise to put up some resistance, it does not translate to resistance when half of them don’t want to believe they are being regulated out of existence. Divide and conquer. Label me “crazy” if you want, but all I’m saying is at least make a phone call or email to your senator saying you oppose this section of the bill. Even if this bill does not pass there will be another, and another just around the corner. Stay vigilant reefers, or enjoy your fate. Much love to everyone.
Similar threads
