In response to the public outcry over ASPCA’s publishing, promoting then disappearing of documents on one of its websites which clearly defined the group’s talking points against no kill
terrorists advocates, the ASPCA issued the lamest of lame “apologies” in, wait for it – a Facebook comment. Not a stand-alone post, but a comment within another post. Addressing the issue is obviously REALLY IMPORTANT to them.
The organization says the documents, which characterized no kill
underwear bombers advocates as “extremists”, were posted by mistake. An error. An oops. A glitch, if you will. Although the faux-pology fails to mention the e-mail promotion of these documents, I suppose that too was simply a case of somebody-hit-a-wrong-key-and-whoopsie. At any rate, the group’s heartfelt apology Facebook comment from November 10 is a passive-aggressive notes fan’s wet dream. In case this too disappears, I am pasting it below for eternal enjoyment:
The documents mistakenly posted on November 8, 2011, do not reflect our views on the position of no-kill, organizations that identify themselves as no-kill, or the people who support no-kill organizations.
Let’s face it – the “no-kill” terminology has been divisive. Sometimes hardworking sheltering professionals have been attacked because the open-admission shelters that employ them have not been able to meet no-kill goals. Since the ASPCA works with these shelter professionals, we have witnessed the toll these attacks have taken on people who got into this work to save animals. Because the no-kill term sometimes divides groups we are trying to unite, at times we have sought to circumvent conflict by avoiding labels. But even if we haven’t always referred to ourselves as no-kill, our philosophy that a no-kill nation is the goal has never wavered.
The ASPCA strongly supports no-kill communities and advocacy groups and regrets any offense caused by the materials. Our experience across the country has taught us that the most successful no-kill communities are those that are built on collaboration, sustainability, knowledge and innovation.
We work with no-kill groups as well as groups that are not yet no-kill, but which aspire to be. In fact, a number of the groups that entered our Save More Lives $100K Challenge this year define themselves as no-kill and we have cheered them on. Our focus is on saving lives, and we are mortified that we would offend those who share our goals.
Shorter ASPCA: We didn’t mean any of that stuff we said, we were drunk and besides, it’s not our fault all y’all are haters and trolls, but we still loves ya.
The comments from no kill
al Qaeda secret handshake club members advocates raise several legitimate questions and issues – all of which continue to be ignored by ASPCA. Among them:
Ryan Clinton: Dear ASPCApro: Can you tell us who wrote the documents? Was it one of your officials or employees? That would help us determine whether to believe you that they were “mistakenly” posted and circulated.
John Sibley: You know, I really think people deserve a bit more of an explanation here – and much as I hate to go off-topic, I might have to ask some of the more pertinent questions in the comments of every single thread until you start answering. Though I haven’t read your crisis manual, ignoring people with legitimate concerns about a dialogue that you started is pretty inexcusable. Please address the issues raised.
You know what might go a long way toward helping no kill
wearers of shoes with protruding fuses advocates believe that these ASPCA documents were posted and promoted by mistake? If some other glitch had ever occurred with the ASPCA, maybe like whoops-we-just-mistakenly-donated-a-million-bucks-to-Fix-Austin. But as things stand, it seems like the only “error” on record is a series of documents outlining how to defeat the no kill movement. And the longer the ASPCA stands with their heads in the sand over this issue, the less likely anyone with a brain will ever believe their lies again.