How is your math?

Caveat posted an article about David Zimmer receiving an award from WSPA (World Society for the Protection of Animals).

In December, the AR group WSPA gave the Ontario Liberals an award for their commitment to animal welfare! Zimmer, who was Bryant's right hand man during the enactment of Bill 132 received the award. This award applied to the regulation on roadside zoos, which I personally agree with regulation, however what alarms me is the involvement and possible coaching by AR groups to our provincial government! Have other AR groups have stuck their sticky fingers into the bowl?

Remember this comment from Zimmer during the committee hearing in Barrie, January 27, 2005.

Ms. Holmes is a registered veterinary technician at the Bracebridge Animal Hospital. In an excerpt she asked the question:
Ms. Holmes: And why do we ban -- like I said, this is like trying to ban a particular race or religious group from this province. There are a certain number of dogs that are considered --
Mr. Zimmer: Because they're qualitatively different in the danger when they attack people and/or other animals. They're just qualitatively different.
Ms. Holmes: I have never, ever been attacked by a dog such as a pit bull type of breed. I have been bitten by a chihuahua, but we don't seem to be concerned about those. I've had a chow come at me; we're not concerned about those.
Mr. Zimmer: Did the chihuahua take your leg off?
Ms. Holmes: No, but he did draw blood.
Mr. Zimmer: So does a mosquito.

Caveat had a post back in December when the award was given out. I must have been out Christmas shopping. I don't know why I missed it. I have suspected an AR influence from the beginning since among other red flags, nothing makes sense to me.
Here is a clip from Hansard 2002 with a reference to WSPA. Does this not speak for itself?

Here is an excerpt:

 Radical animal rights groups in Canada certainly will use this new legislation as the basis for legal harassment and unjust prosecutions, and in fact already have stated their intention to do so. The cost of defending an unjust prosecution, even if there eventually is a not guilty verdict, is a burden that ordinary Canadians cannot afford, nor should they be subjected to this burden. The animal rights lobby has argued consistently that legal rights for animals cannot be achieved until animals are no longer considered property under the law. I want to give the House just a few examples that illustrate the true intentions of these groups.

    A lawyer for the World Society for the Protection of Animals, Lesli Bisgould, has been quoted as saying:

In fact, the legal status of animals today is analogous with that of oppressed groups in society over the past century, the right not to be seen as a means to an end, the right not to be property.

What are we (the dog community) going to do about this?

The dog community is going to have to get collectively stronger and stand up tall to end this erosion of dog owners civil rights.

I remember a time when I thought, this can't happen in Canada...

First they came for...