Native American Tribe Claims Anti-Cockfighting Statute Doesn't Apply on Its Territory

On Nov. 5, Oklahoma voters overwhelmingly passed an initiative banning cockfighting in that state. But a Kiowa Indian association claims that the new law does not apply to Kiowa tribal lands.

Mike Turner of the Kiowa Association for the Preservation of Cultural and Rural Lifestyles told the Ada Evening News that,

The Kiowa Tribe has a treaty with the state, which gives us aboriginal rights of occupancy. Under the Constitution, all treaties are recognized in all courts and considered supreme law. This is something the state has overlooked. You can’t change precedence.

Turner said that his Kiowa Association will begin selling permits to allow cockfighting in Oklahoma on the tribe’s territory. The cockfighting license would be configured such that the tribe would lease flocks, property and other facilities currently used by cockfighters, thus making it protected as tribal activities.

The state of Oklahoma, not surprisingly, disagrees. Neal Leader, senior assistant attorney general of Oklahoma, wrote a letter to Turner that read, in part,

It appears . . . you are attempting got create a safe haven from Oklahoma’s recently enacted Anti-Cockfighitng Law for cockfighting activities taking place on Kiowa Tribe Indian Country and elsewhere . . . under Federal Law, Oklahoma’s Anti-Cockfighting Law is as applicable in Indian Country as it is outside Indian Country.

This dispute will likely be resolved by the courts.

Source:

Kiowa members claim cockfighting legal on tribal land. Jeremy Cantrell, Ada Evening News (Oklahoma), November 25, 2002.

Cambridge Research Facility Hearings

Hearings were held this week on Cambridge University’s proposal to build a primate research facility in Girton, just outside Cambridge.

The proposal has been rejected twice before on grounds that the research center is certain to become a focal point for animal rights protests which could disrupt traffic and create other public safety hazards. Earlier this year a planning commission rejected the plans 17-4 after hearing from police about disruptions that activists might create.

That decision led to criticism from Prime Minister Tony Blair who said that the problems obtaining approval for the site threatened Great Britain’s standing as a leader in medical research.

The laboratory would hose macaque and marmoset monkeys used as part of brain-related research. Science minister Lord Sainsbury told BBC2’s Newsnight that the research center was of national importance,

I was asked by the local planning authority what my view was and whether it was a project of national importance. Clearly it is a project of national importance. It is doing major research in a key area of science. It is now up to the planning authority to give their view as to whether this is right from a planning point of view.

Cambridge University has defended the research center as absolutely vital,

Advances in the treatment of Parkinson’s disease, asthma and strokes have all been made as a result of research with primates. Ongoing research with primates offer the hope of effective treatments for conditions such as Alzheimer’s disease and sight disorders, as well as the development of vaccines for malaria and Aids.

We understand that many people find the use of monkeys in medical research distressing. Research methods are continually evolving and while scientists and medical researchers aim to reduce work involving animals to a minimum, some of this work must continue if we are to make essential life-saving advances in medicine.

Animal rights activists, predictably, attacked such research as both cruel and unnecessary. Dan Lyons of Uncaged Campaigns told The Guardian (UK),

This research will cause suffering. The government tries to promote this centre as a scientific one, but it’s more to do with trying to create an impression of a business-friendly environment to attract more biotech and pharmaceutical companies. It’s a global business concern that’s driving this, rather than pure science.

Our concern is that the government is trying to present a commercial interest as a national interest. What’s ethically right is at odds with that commercial interest.

Regardless, the center is likely a done deal given Blair’s support and the fact that this time the decision rests solely with Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott.

Wendy Higgins of the British Union for the Abolition of Animal Vivisection told The BBC,

It is a political decision that will be made, not one about planning. The prime minister has already made his position absolutely clear and now that John Prescott has decided to recover the final decision for himself, it is highly unlikely that he will go against Mr. Blair.

But, of course, the decision not to build it before was predicated largely on unruly animal rights activists. Surely, those who engage in hooliganism should not be rewarded for their behavior by allowing its possibility to prevent the construction of a research facility. Lets just hope the British government is committed to dealing with animal rights extremism that will inevitably be directed at the facility once it is built.

Sources:

Cambridge argues for monkey research. The BBC, November 25, 2002.

Minister backs animal testing lab plans. Polly Curtis, The Guardian (UK), November 26, 2002.

Ah, the Advantages of Objective Media

Over the past few weeks it seemed like Roger Ailes memo to George W. Bush was getting as much attention on CNN as the DC sniper’s tarot card did. As far as I’m concerned, all broadcast news is nothing but entertainment and should be treated as such, but CNN set out a clear standard of objectivity in its relentless reporting and criticism of Ailes’ memo.

So how come I wake up this morning and see this running across their news ticker,

Woman who wrote riot-inciting Miss World story resigns

So even CNN thinks the Nigerian riots were all the fault of some uppity woman reporter who didn’t know her place. Presumably we will soon see headlines like, “Woman dressed in high skirt and low-cut top gets raped.”

Maybe if they’d grow a spine down in Atlanta, they might be able to stop the ass kicking they’re receiving from Fox.

PETA's Turkey Terrorist Television Ad

Just in time for Thanksgiving, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals produced a television commercial that draws on fear of terrorism to sell the vegetarian message.

The ad shows terrorists taking over a supermarket, with the store manager bound and gagged and shoppers cowering in fear while an unseen terrorist declares that innocent creatures will be beaten, scaled and dismembered if anyone resists.

At the end of the commercial, the terrorist is revealed to be a turkey puppet whose demand is that people stop eating meat.

Well, it is certainly consistent with PETA’s message that it is okay to use both violence and threats of violence to further the animal rights movement. After all, when serial killer Andrew Cunanan murdered fashion designer Versace, it was left to PETA’s Dan Mathews to proclaim that he admired Cunanan for finally getting Versace to stop using fur.

PETA’s Lisa Lange told The New York Times that,

A fake supermarket takeover has zip to do with the events of Sept. 11. You’d really have to be a big grump not to see the humor in all of this.

A big grump? Or perhaps someone aware of the numerous statements and actions by PETA staffers in sympathy with and support of animal rights violence.

Fortunately, only a single television station actually accepted the commercial, and PETA tried to gain a bit of additional press by announcing their “withdrawal” of the advertisement before it could be shown on that station.

Source:

‘Turkey Terror’ Ad by Animal Rights Group. The New York Times, November 28, 2002.

Animal Liberation Front Steals 128 Dogs from Italian Research Facility

Animal Liberation Front activists broke into an Italian dog-breeding center on November 24, 2002 and stole 128 beagles. The dogs were to be used for medical research according to police.

Police estimated about 10 people broke into the farm and stole the animals as well as spray painting animal rights slogans such as “Murderers” and “ALF will free all” at the facility.

Despite that last slogan, the ALF activists left behind the 800+ remaining dogs at the breeding center.

Source:

‘Terrorists’ steal 128 beagles. The Herald Sun (UK), November 24, 2002.

Gary Yourofsky — Killing Researchers Is Okay, But Don't Touch That Turkey!

One of the more absurd commentaries on dietary choices for Thanksgiving had to come from People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals’ Gary Yourofsky lecturing people about choosing tofu over turkey.

Yourofsky told about 30 students gathered at Midwestern State University,

I do not eat anything – or a product of anything – with a face, a mother or a bowl movement. . . . But I’m not an animal lover. Call me anything but an animal lover. . . . [I want] simple decency [for animals] . . .of all the exploited beings on earth, animals are the most terrorized.

Apparently Yourofsky has forgotten his advocacy of terrorizing anyone who dares disagree with him. As he told The Toledo Blade in the Summer of 2001, “we must be willing to do whatever it takes to gain their [animals] freedom and stop their torture.” When asked if this extended to killing “animal abusers” Yourofsky said, without missing a beat, “I would unequivocally support that, too.”

Yourofsky’s concern about simple decency and terrorism stops with his fellow human beings.

Source:

PETA rep pitches turkey-less holiday. Brye Butler, Times Record News (Texas), November 30, 2002.