But now she lives in a loving forever home, has learned that life can be full of kindness and adventure. Ten minute video (accompanied with beautiful music) to make you cry with joy.
www.greatmysterypublishing.com ... "Even a small star shines in the darkness." - Finnish Proverb
Saturday, September 12, 2015
200 Horses Rescued From Horrible Abuse, Now Living a Happy Life (video)
Many of the horses seen here, were rescued from the horror of the HRT industry, kept pregnant and in tiny stalls, before usually being shipped off to slaughterhouses for pet food. The HRT industry uses these horses for their pregnant horse urine to create drugs for women with menopause. Basically, these HRT industry horses are kept in the horse equivalent of battery hens, or factory farmed pigs.
Duchess Sanctuary—operated by The Fund for Animals in partnership with The HSUS—is a 1,120-acre facility located outside of Oakland, Ore., that was established in 2008 as an oasis for about 200 formerly abused, abandoned, neglected, and homeless horses.
Below are several photographs showing the abuse poor horses, used to produce menopause drugs, suffer. These horses also have every foal they give birth to, taken away and sent to a slaughterhouse; just like dairy cows who have every baby calf they give birth to, taken away from their grieving mother within hours of birth, their tiny babies sent off to be slaughtered for veal/profit).
Duchess Sanctuary—operated by The Fund for Animals in partnership with The HSUS—is a 1,120-acre facility located outside of Oakland, Ore., that was established in 2008 as an oasis for about 200 formerly abused, abandoned, neglected, and homeless horses.
Below are several photographs showing the abuse poor horses, used to produce menopause drugs, suffer. These horses also have every foal they give birth to, taken away and sent to a slaughterhouse; just like dairy cows who have every baby calf they give birth to, taken away from their grieving mother within hours of birth, their tiny babies sent off to be slaughtered for veal/profit).
Sunday, August 23, 2015
Pesticides killing bees, killing off birds too!
The bee-harming pesticides are worse than we imagined. Research suggests that neonicotinoids aren’t just decimating bee colonies -- they’re hurting birds too. Researchers found that in areas with high concentrations of neonicotinoids, bird populations declined every year. This means our worst fears are coming true -- neonicotinoids may be moving up the food chain and killing our birds and our bees.
(This post is courtesy of SumofUs.org)
For the sake of the birds, the bees, and the whole food chain, we are challenging one of the biggest neonicotinoids producers of them all: Bayer. In two weeks, we’re going straight to Bayer’s door with our massive petition -- and we hope to have your name in our massive petition box. Please sign and share this vital petition here.
It's not just the bees anymore. Neonicotinoids are killing our birds too. It’s time to get Bayer to stop producing these chemicals.
We already knew that bees, insects, and small creatures that consume neonics are facing a decline in population. But the researchers are suggesting that Bayer’s neonicotinoids are even more harmful: Birds that eat food that consumed neonics are dying too.
The researchers searched extensively for any other outside cause that could account for the declines: urbanization, other environmental factors, land use changes. They couldn't find one. The only plausible explanation? Bee-harming neonicotinoids.
As expected, Bayer is trying to write off this scientific study. Why? Because for companies like Bayer, profits trump saving our food chain. By speaking up, we're changing the equation for these companies and making sure they protect the bees.
Here’s the scary part about all this: until more research is done, there's no way to tell how far up the food chain neonics can reach.
Thanks to all of us, we've convinced major American retailers Home Depot and Lowe's to stop stocking neonics. And we've pooled our resources to challenge Bayer's lawsuit against the EU for banning this chemical -- over a million of us have spoken out against the lawsuit. We've made a lot of progress together, but we're far from done.
We are going straight to their headquarters to deliver our message for Bayer to save the birds and the bees. Will you add your name to the petition?
More information:
Not just bees: Controversial pesticide linked to decline in birds, Wired, July 9, 2014
Neonicotinoids linked to recent fall in farmland bird numbers, The Guardian, July 9, 2014
(This post is courtesy of SumofUs.org)
For the sake of the birds, the bees, and the whole food chain, we are challenging one of the biggest neonicotinoids producers of them all: Bayer. In two weeks, we’re going straight to Bayer’s door with our massive petition -- and we hope to have your name in our massive petition box. Please sign and share this vital petition here.
It's not just the bees anymore. Neonicotinoids are killing our birds too. It’s time to get Bayer to stop producing these chemicals.
We already knew that bees, insects, and small creatures that consume neonics are facing a decline in population. But the researchers are suggesting that Bayer’s neonicotinoids are even more harmful: Birds that eat food that consumed neonics are dying too.
The researchers searched extensively for any other outside cause that could account for the declines: urbanization, other environmental factors, land use changes. They couldn't find one. The only plausible explanation? Bee-harming neonicotinoids.
As expected, Bayer is trying to write off this scientific study. Why? Because for companies like Bayer, profits trump saving our food chain. By speaking up, we're changing the equation for these companies and making sure they protect the bees.
Here’s the scary part about all this: until more research is done, there's no way to tell how far up the food chain neonics can reach.
Thanks to all of us, we've convinced major American retailers Home Depot and Lowe's to stop stocking neonics. And we've pooled our resources to challenge Bayer's lawsuit against the EU for banning this chemical -- over a million of us have spoken out against the lawsuit. We've made a lot of progress together, but we're far from done.
We are going straight to their headquarters to deliver our message for Bayer to save the birds and the bees. Will you add your name to the petition?
More information:
Not just bees: Controversial pesticide linked to decline in birds, Wired, July 9, 2014
Neonicotinoids linked to recent fall in farmland bird numbers, The Guardian, July 9, 2014
Thursday, June 11, 2015
Cora's Pet Project: Healing South Africa, one animal at a time
A moving story about an amazing, courageous woman who works tirelessly to help animals, and people in need, in South Africa.
Cora Bailey ventures into some of South Africa’s most deprived townships to treat people’s animals, but she also has to confront the even more urgent needs of their owners.
“There’s hardly a day goes by when you don’t see some kind of suffering,” she tells Dateline's Amos Roberts. “Sometimes you see suffering that’s almost indescribable.”
In the tough townships where she works, people can’t afford animal care, but she just can’t say no to treating the ill, injured and abused animals that come her way.
Cora’s work started 25 years ago, after she became frustrated by the lack of concern for animal welfare in the townships.
“I had to raise the money myself and it was all at my own risk and there was a lot of negativity about it,” she says.
Now, her Community Led Animal Welfare (CLAW) clinic is backed by an animal charity.
But violence is still a daily reality that she’s witnessed firsthand – the area where she works has one of the highest murder rates in the province.
And that divide between rich and poor in modern South Africa angers her.
“Political freedom hasn’t put food on the table for everyone, political freedom hasn’t meant decent housing or sanitation,” she says.
“I can be in the townships for weeks on end, going daily and never see another white. Sometimes just a bus with tourists and they are all foreign and what a shame that is.”
“We South Africans aren’t a bad lot and I think a lot more people would do things if they got over their fear - you know people in this country fear each other.”
Story By Amos Roberts. Aired on Channel SBS One Tuesday, May 19, 2015 - 21:30 . You can view the video of this story - duration 25 minutes here. Definitely worth watching!
Cora Bailey ventures into some of South Africa’s most deprived townships to treat people’s animals, but she also has to confront the even more urgent needs of their owners.
“There’s hardly a day goes by when you don’t see some kind of suffering,” she tells Dateline's Amos Roberts. “Sometimes you see suffering that’s almost indescribable.”
In the tough townships where she works, people can’t afford animal care, but she just can’t say no to treating the ill, injured and abused animals that come her way.
Cora’s work started 25 years ago, after she became frustrated by the lack of concern for animal welfare in the townships.
“I had to raise the money myself and it was all at my own risk and there was a lot of negativity about it,” she says.
Now, her Community Led Animal Welfare (CLAW) clinic is backed by an animal charity.
But violence is still a daily reality that she’s witnessed firsthand – the area where she works has one of the highest murder rates in the province.
And that divide between rich and poor in modern South Africa angers her.
“Political freedom hasn’t put food on the table for everyone, political freedom hasn’t meant decent housing or sanitation,” she says.
“I can be in the townships for weeks on end, going daily and never see another white. Sometimes just a bus with tourists and they are all foreign and what a shame that is.”
“We South Africans aren’t a bad lot and I think a lot more people would do things if they got over their fear - you know people in this country fear each other.”
Story By Amos Roberts. Aired on Channel SBS One Tuesday, May 19, 2015 - 21:30 . You can view the video of this story - duration 25 minutes here. Definitely worth watching!
Beautiful footage of a mother whale and her calf
Goes to show, drones can be used for something positive. This video footage of a mama whale and her baby taken by a drone, is stunning.
Wednesday, June 3, 2015
Put an End to Killer Whale Shows at Seaworld!
Killer whales are beautiful and incredibly intelligent animals that deserve so much more. Whales in captivity are subjected to conditions that are not only unnatural but also cruel. They spend their day swimming around a concrete pool when whales in the wild often swim 100 miles a day. It is a known fact that animals in captivity used for performing are subject to depression, frustration, and lack of energy. Often times whales are seen floating at the surface for hours on end which would never happen in the open ocean. Though SeaWorld has denied it, there is footage describing how they have separated mothers and calves which sadly only adds to their whales' depression. Roughly 95% of killer whales in captivity experience collapsed dorsal fins while this only occurs in 1% of orcas in the wild.
Orcas have highly developed brains which allows them to have strong family bonds and heightened emotions. Captivity deprives them of so much and their quality of life is at an extreme low which too often results in aggression.
These are just a few reasons why I strongly urge you to help me give killer whales the life and freedom that they so greatly deserve.
Update #1 May 28, 2015
SeaWorld is continuing their efforts to increase ticket sales and so far they have been successful. After the release of Blackfish, attendance declined as audiences realized that keeping whales in captivity for entertainment is wrong. However with their new commercial drawing people back in, now is the time to act and put a stop to this.
Petition Author: Jenna Riddensdale
Please sign and share this petition.
Orcas have highly developed brains which allows them to have strong family bonds and heightened emotions. Captivity deprives them of so much and their quality of life is at an extreme low which too often results in aggression.
These are just a few reasons why I strongly urge you to help me give killer whales the life and freedom that they so greatly deserve.
Update #1 May 28, 2015
SeaWorld is continuing their efforts to increase ticket sales and so far they have been successful. After the release of Blackfish, attendance declined as audiences realized that keeping whales in captivity for entertainment is wrong. However with their new commercial drawing people back in, now is the time to act and put a stop to this.
Petition Author: Jenna Riddensdale
Please sign and share this petition.
Friday, March 20, 2015
Guest Blog Post - "Writing From Within" by Dr Bob Rich
Writing from within
Here are two ways of writing about a person:
Outside view
Horrified, Geordie watched the rope snake past him, down, down… until the weight of it tugged on his harness. He looked like a tiny spider hanging onto the cliff face. His fingers were like the claws of an anchor as they desperately grasped tiny crevices in the rock. Beads of sweat were visible on his brow, and his legs trembled.
Inside view
Horrified, Geordie watched the rope snake past him, down, down… until the weight of it tugged on his harness. He felt like a tiny spider hanging onto the cliff face. His fingers were so rigid they hurt as he desperately grasped tiny crevices in the rock. Sweating, trembling with tension, he asked himself, Why did that rope come loose?
What’s the difference?
The first version is clearly from the point of view (POV) of someone watching Geordie. The only indication of his inner reality is the first word. The rest is a description of what he looks like.
The second version is what Geordie experiences. Here, you are invited into his reality, to BE the person on the rock face with the rope now tugging him down instead of holding him up.
Does it matter?
As you read a story in the outside view, you are continuously given subliminal messages that this is only a story, something someone is telling you. You are given information to allow you to see the character from the outside, as in a movie or play.
In the inside view, you are given the tools to go far beyond that. A book in words can be very much more compelling than a movie, because the potential is there for receiving information that camera and microphone cannot capture: bodily sensations, smells, tastes, thoughts, emotions.
In fiction writing, the author’s job is to specify a reality, a cast of characters, and a progression of events. The reader needs to be supplied with enough information to imagine that all this is real. Ideally, the writer is the director. The reader is the audience, but also the character whose point of view is currently being used, and the creator of the reality of the story. That’s right. The author doesn’t do the act of creation. The reader does. This is why no two readers ever receive the same story. This is why seeing a movie of a book you enjoyed is almost invariably disappointing — someone else has done the creating, and will have done it differently from your version.
Reading something written in the inside view allows you to live the experience of the story.
Is there a place for the outside view?
Yes, it has two uses.
First, the journalist, the historian, the biographer necessarily tell their story from the author’s POV. Reporters cannot read minds, so can only state their own thoughts, insofar as these are relevant. For the rest, they need to state the words and actions of the people they write about.
Second, in any scene, there will be the person whose POV we are using, for example Geordie in the snippet I started with. While that person should be presented from the inside view, any other people cannot. Geordie can’t read minds either. When he looks up and sees Sam looking down with an evil leer and waving a knife, he doesn’t know Sam’s thoughts, bodily sensations, emotions, motives. He automatically deduces some of them from Sam’s words and actions. In this, he may be right, or completely mistaken.
So, if we make Sam the current witness, then the outside view example is just right — as long as we delete the first word. Sam cannot tell that Geordie is horrified, although he may hope so.
A good author will deliberately use inside view for the witness to the scene, whose POV we are in, and outside view for all other people. I hope you’ll now be aware of this in your reading, and more important, in your writing.
Link
This is from my newsletter, Bobbing Around. The specific link is https://bobrich18.wordpress.com/2014/10/02/bobbing-around-volume-14-number-5/#within
Bio
Dr Bob Rich is an Australian storyteller with 15 published books, 5 of them award-winners, and a freelance editor. However, his most important activity is as a professional grandfather. You can check out what this means at https://bobrich18.wordpress.com
Here are two ways of writing about a person:
Outside view
Horrified, Geordie watched the rope snake past him, down, down… until the weight of it tugged on his harness. He looked like a tiny spider hanging onto the cliff face. His fingers were like the claws of an anchor as they desperately grasped tiny crevices in the rock. Beads of sweat were visible on his brow, and his legs trembled.
Inside view
Horrified, Geordie watched the rope snake past him, down, down… until the weight of it tugged on his harness. He felt like a tiny spider hanging onto the cliff face. His fingers were so rigid they hurt as he desperately grasped tiny crevices in the rock. Sweating, trembling with tension, he asked himself, Why did that rope come loose?
What’s the difference?
The first version is clearly from the point of view (POV) of someone watching Geordie. The only indication of his inner reality is the first word. The rest is a description of what he looks like.
The second version is what Geordie experiences. Here, you are invited into his reality, to BE the person on the rock face with the rope now tugging him down instead of holding him up.
Does it matter?
As you read a story in the outside view, you are continuously given subliminal messages that this is only a story, something someone is telling you. You are given information to allow you to see the character from the outside, as in a movie or play.
In the inside view, you are given the tools to go far beyond that. A book in words can be very much more compelling than a movie, because the potential is there for receiving information that camera and microphone cannot capture: bodily sensations, smells, tastes, thoughts, emotions.
In fiction writing, the author’s job is to specify a reality, a cast of characters, and a progression of events. The reader needs to be supplied with enough information to imagine that all this is real. Ideally, the writer is the director. The reader is the audience, but also the character whose point of view is currently being used, and the creator of the reality of the story. That’s right. The author doesn’t do the act of creation. The reader does. This is why no two readers ever receive the same story. This is why seeing a movie of a book you enjoyed is almost invariably disappointing — someone else has done the creating, and will have done it differently from your version.
Reading something written in the inside view allows you to live the experience of the story.
Is there a place for the outside view?
Yes, it has two uses.
First, the journalist, the historian, the biographer necessarily tell their story from the author’s POV. Reporters cannot read minds, so can only state their own thoughts, insofar as these are relevant. For the rest, they need to state the words and actions of the people they write about.
Second, in any scene, there will be the person whose POV we are using, for example Geordie in the snippet I started with. While that person should be presented from the inside view, any other people cannot. Geordie can’t read minds either. When he looks up and sees Sam looking down with an evil leer and waving a knife, he doesn’t know Sam’s thoughts, bodily sensations, emotions, motives. He automatically deduces some of them from Sam’s words and actions. In this, he may be right, or completely mistaken.
So, if we make Sam the current witness, then the outside view example is just right — as long as we delete the first word. Sam cannot tell that Geordie is horrified, although he may hope so.
A good author will deliberately use inside view for the witness to the scene, whose POV we are in, and outside view for all other people. I hope you’ll now be aware of this in your reading, and more important, in your writing.
Link
This is from my newsletter, Bobbing Around. The specific link is https://bobrich18.wordpress.com/2014/10/02/bobbing-around-volume-14-number-5/#within
Bio
Dr Bob Rich is an Australian storyteller with 15 published books, 5 of them award-winners, and a freelance editor. However, his most important activity is as a professional grandfather. You can check out what this means at https://bobrich18.wordpress.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)