There’s always an ongoing war being waged when it comes to anything welfare. So it’s not surprising at all that when it comes to animal welfare, battles within battles collide for space in what is a very messy and emotionally charged and littered theatre of action. The Bali dog environment is a concertinaed version. A very overcrowded and cramped physical space, inhabited by a lot of suffering dogs and a growing number of fanatical humans fighting for recognition and rights.
Animals Australia recently went full scale, full bore and full frontal at and about the dog meat trade, representing primarily Bali dogs as their rationale for opening up a very nasty scab and letting the pus flow. Since the exposure went public there has been continued debate and chatter in regard to how successful the campaign would be, could be and actually has been. No one could argue that the action of Animals Australia in exposing and subsequently bringing such a horrific practice to worldwide attention was certainly justified.
However it’s been observed lately, that there is a simmering movement, a murmur of sorts, a building disquiet rapidly approaching a screeching scowl. Questions are being asked, accusations are being lobbed and explanations are being demanded, as to the true intent behind Animals Australia and its strategy.
Transparency is always, unfortunately always, a very fluid medium. In reality it’s always in the eye of the individual beholder and unfortunately it all depends on how the holder is placing his or her eye.
Animals Australia will of course answer the questions asked at a time and place of their choosing, it’s their ball and their game, at this point.
All organizations should freely and widely open up their books for total unadulterated uncontaminated and transparent viewing, especially those who purport to be for not profit. Those who don’t or refuse to do so should be strongly encouraged to do so by their followers.
Unfortunately as in all welfare schemes there are many scams, many fronting as legitimate well-meaning organizations, with slick presentations and even slicker founders and followers. Many of these get away with the charade, plainly because their followers are so far and deeply duped down the line, that the real truth would be way too confronting and embarrassing.
Only time will tell if Animals Australia has joined the long conga line of conning and fooling the masses or in proving that their intent was genuine. Even if it turns out that not one single RW restaurant is shut down, if Animals Australia can show through their honest and transparent responses and actions that they had and have and will continue to fight for Bali dogs and Bali people, then transparency has not been shredded.
As for all those other organizations involved in the Bali dog war of tug and shove. Let the rightful questions being asked and targeted at Animals Australia be a very sobering and salient warning.