Okay we are ready to enter the Schengen package come with a rich experience: killing dogs, pedophilia, prostitution, conruptie up to the highest level in the state presedinte.Ce do you think we're quite ready fit you need partners so rich! !
joi, 3 octombrie 2013
Weather we get Schengen!
Okay we are ready to enter the Schengen package come with a rich experience: killing dogs, pedophilia, prostitution, conruptie up to the highest level in the state presedinte.Ce do you think we're quite ready fit you need partners so rich! !
European Union: Please take action regarding Romania, a European country challenging Europe
On 27th of September, 2013 Occupy for Animals has sent the following letter to the mentioned addressees:
To:
The European Parliament
The European Commission
The Council of Europe
The European Ombudsman
The European Anti-Fraud Office
The Belgian State Secretary for European AffairsThe European Parliament's Intergroup on the Welfare and Conservation of Animals
Dear Sir / Madam,
On 10th September the Lower House of the Romanian Parliament voted GEO 155/2001 to legitimise a 'catch and kill' policy for all homeless animals. The terminology used during the debate at the parliament was 'eradication'. Since this date media frenzy has been created because of the death of a young boy under what remains dubious circumstances. However the stray animals were blamed and as a result of the media frenzy and the vote, a state of abuse of animals exists now in Romania. Animals and their owners and protectors were immediately, and still are, at serious risk. It must be remembered that many millions of Romanians are animal owners or protectors of the animals. This law has polarized Romania's society and made it dangerously divisive.
It had to be expected that millions of animal lovers would seek to protect their own animals or the animals they 'protect' on the streets. Millions! It had to be expected that half a country would seek to defend and protect, and that the other half would seek to aggress.
Not only would this policy, bring infamy to Romanian authorities and by association, with Romania, apparently ill considered was the fact that an 'eradication' strategy simply will not be successful. Owned dogs will continue to breed and thereby ensuring a plentiful and constant supply of animals on the streets. Occupy for Animals, along with many others, suggested and still maintains, that this is a desirable condition! If implemented, it would therefore be a futile and ineffective policy.
The 'Making The Link' Study and Project Group - a major collaboration of international organisations, academics and world leading experts in THE LINK between exposure to animal abuse and the resulting effect on children's psychological health and development, had warned the Romanian Constitutional Court that the implementation of GEO 155/2001 - their 'eradication' strategy, which can best be described as potentially 'the greatest animal genocidal impact on human health in European history' - would have a deleterious impact of the health of the children of Romania.
'Making The Link' - initiator Malcolm Plant (BSc, BA (Hons), MSc, Dipl Psych., Fellow of the Institute for Human-Animal Connection, University of Denver) wrote (among other):
"We would urge you to re-enforce your decision last year on precisely the same issue and with no additional changes to circumstances. Our concern is primarily for the health of the children which we will be measuring over the next few years. Academically we are anticipating hitherto profound impact on the children's health unseen in any previous study if you were to ratify the proposed amendments. As human beings, as parents, we are frightened about the effects if the new generation of Romanians are exposed to street horrors on a previously unprecedented scale."
On 25th September, 2013 Constitutional Court judge Petre Lazaroiu, suggested that "the mass killing of stray dogs in Romania could traumatize the population"... Then the entire place ruled to cull all dogs... and that the eradication of Romania's homeless animals - although it had been ruled unconstitutional in January 2012 - was now "constitutional"!
On 25th of September, the Romanian Constitutional Court had an opportunity to define whether Romania is a country worthy of being called civilized or whether it should be consigned to popular perception of a country unworthy of being considered anything other than barbaric, mismanaged, corrupt and dangerous. They chose the latter.
Their approval of, and the implementation of GEO 155/2001, has produced worldwide condemnation and a perception that Romania is a country which introduces medieval practices and governs in a draconian mode. Most of the 'civilized' countries have introduced a 'Catch, Neuter, Vaccinate and Return' policy and now have very few homeless animals on the streets. This is a 21st century methodology.
Not only have the Romanian Government dismissed the warnings expressed by the experts, and failed to acknowledge T-N-R as the only proven successful strategy to control and curb stray animal populations (in fact: ALL 'catch & kill' policies have historically proven unsuccessful) but being aware of the costs and profits to be made from implementing the proposed 'eradication' strategy, are aware that significant personal profits can be made through corrupt alliances.
The net result will be abject strategic failure and the number of animals will not decrease. Through corrupt alliances, personal profits from the animal corpse disposal will have been secured.
But the biggest cost is in the human domain. Children exposed to the capture and often immediate slaughter of the animals will seek to psychologically protect themselves from such trauma. They will desensitize. Reduce their sensitivity towards living creatures including fellow humans. Some will embrace the attributes of their violent society and finding legitimized sanction for the destruction of the animal sub-group, will also aggress against the animals.
There is then some inevitability that once such aggression is socially sanctioned, their journey will continue by aggressing against person, against property. They will see no distinction. Their journey can easily lead to the killing of another person. Significant research has identified this development and ending. This is the slow diminishment of a society's moral substance and gradual increase into a prevalence of violence but a more immediate but equally destructive effect can be seen.
In any society, irrespective of political dictats, there is no homogeneity of support. Emotive issues exacerbate differences. Any society will contain those who passionately support the rights of companion animals and also those who have no regard or who are motivated by political hysteria. At such levels of passion, in counterpoint to each other, this polarization can produce levels of acute violence. Neighbor against neighbor! Even before official recognition of the law in Romania, two neighbors have fought over this issue and one was killed. Even before! One can only stand and watch now and wait while the death count gets higher!
So we have a government introduced policy which at best is ill informed, historically proven to be unsuccessful with previously proven successful strategies dismissed. And on top of all, a strategy which will polarize society resulting in violence between citizens and almost as if to reinforce the evidence that the strategy is ill advised, ill considered and incompetent, the children will be psychologically damaged. One cannot conceive of a more counter productive, societally destructive direction taken by any European Union Member Government in recent times.
Additional information is compiled at:
http://www.occupyforanimals.org/romania--a-country-cries-out-for-revenge-after-the-tragic-death-of-a-four-year-old-boy-who-had-been-attacked-by-dogs.html
And:
http://www.occupyforanimals.org/romania---on-the-greatest-animal-genocide-in-european-history-government-initiated-anarchy-violations-of-human-rights-and-children-rights.html
Occupy for Animals is being bombarded with emails and calls from desperate Romanian animal activists and rescuers who are pleading for help!
Not only are their own companion animals, and/or the animals that are in the care of their organisations and who most certainly constitute no 'danger' to the public and who often even already have potential adopters (outside of Romania) at risk of being taken by the dog catchers and thrown in their so-called 'shelters' where death is a certainty and not an option, but the people, too, are at risk of being physically attacked!
And it's only the beginning!
Considering the scale of the tragedy that is already unfolding, the societal disaster along with the potentially 'greatest animal genocidal impact on human health in European history' that we are heading towards, we are respectfully begging for you to intervene and to help Romania to get back on track before it's too late!
In addition to our plea for help, we also have a few questions that we - together with very very many people from Europe and from all around the world - would really love to have an answer to.
Below, our questions, suggestions, and remarks.
To the EUROPEAN COMMISSION, the COUNCIL OF EUROPE, the EUROPEAN OMBUDSMAN, and the European Parliament's Intergroup on the Welfare and Conservation of Animals - regarding the new 'legislation':
Romania's Constitutional Court ruled on 25th September, 2013 that the proposal which had been accepted by the Lower House of the Romanian Parliament on 10th of September, 2013, is "constitutional" and that the 'euthanasia' of all homeless dogs in Romania, after 14 days spent in their so-called 'shelters if not adopted or perished before this time has elapsed, is 'constitutional', too, although they had ruled in January 2012, that: "the killing of healthy animals was unconstitutional as a mean to control stray animal populations until all other solutions had been applied".
What has changed since January 2012 on the "management" of Romania's stray animals populations?
We haven't heard of any massive sterilization campaigns!
We haven't heard of any 'education of the populace regarding the importance of spay & neuter' their owned (but allowed to roam freely and to mate as they wish) companion animals! And in this context, we would like to remind you that an estimated 5 million puppies are born each year in Romania in rural areas of which some are being killed by their owners, and the others are simply being thrown out on the streets or in the woods.
We haven't heard of any measures taken to undermine breeding, including "back yard breeding"!
To the European Parliament's Intergroup on the Welfare and Conservation of Animals - regarding the before mentioned points:
Can, and will, the European Parliament's Intergroup on the Conservation and Welfare of Animals, please ask Mrs Daciana Sarbu - Vice President of the Intergroup, co-initiator of the Written Declaration on Dog Population Management 0026/2011, wife of Romania's Prime Minister Victor Ponta - what she has done in her own country to promote and implement a humane management of the stray animals populations as she has so brightly described in the WD 0026/2011?
Please ask Mrs Sarbu what she has done to promote responsible animal ownership in her own country?
Please ask Mrs Sarbu what she has done to educate the populace of Romania about the importance of spay and neuter, and/or not to let their animals roam freely and to mate as they wish?
Please ask Mrs Sarbu what she has done to avoid the tragedy that is now unfolding, bringing unnecessary suffering and death to both animals and their protectors?
As the wife of Romania's Prime Minister Vîctor Ponta, and a Vice President of the Intergroup, she had, and still has a unique position and opportunity to bring change to her country regarding stray animals population control and welfare, but we haven't - sadly and to our very great deception - heard of any actions taken by Mrs Sarbu in this field. In fact, we haven't heard anything from her since the adoption of WD0026/2011.
The questions might be, and probably are, irrelevant because they simply won't change a thing to the situation of the poor homeless dogs in Romania, but we really would love to know her, and/or your answer to our questions. In fact, we are sure that very very many people are interested in knowing the answers to these reasonable and justified questions.
Also, with the speech that Mrs Sarbu has given at the Intergroup-meeting from 12th of September, 2013, her totally misinformed and erroneous statements self-declared her as being unfit for office as either a member of the Intergroup, let alone as Vice President. Please, download and listen to said speech at the following link:
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B_iBJnK4Nmk1ZjhFYl9tMVNmU0k/edit
In light of the surprisingly misinformed content of the presentation by Mme Sarbu and her continued absence from Intergroup involvement especially when a serious focus is placed on her country, we would reserve the right to further explore Mme Sarbu's suitability for office and we are sure that you would encourage any adverse detail to be presented, as you of course only want officials who exemplify the highest quality in seeking the best of interest for the animals and people of Europe.
Can the Intergroup please advise us as to who to complain to if someone is failing in his/her duty as regards to the position he/she, maybe now un-deservingly, finds himself/herself in?
To the EUROPEAN COMMISSION, the COUNCIL OF EUROPE, and the EUROPEAN OMBUDSMAN - regarding the new 'legislation':
Former senator Marius Marinescu, president of the Romanian Animal Protection Association FPAM, and initiator of the Law 'Marinescu 1' commonly known as Law 9/2008, officially stated that:
"LAW NO. 9/2008 (Law MARINESCU 1) remains in force. Euthanasia is prohibited.
And that:
Article 7 index 1 of the Act provides: "It is forbidden to euthanize dogs, cats and other animals, except animals with incurable diseases identified by the veterinarian."
and that:
GEO (Government Emergency Ordinance) 155/2001 concerning euthanasia, approved on 10 September, 2013 by the Parliament, does not repeal the law 'Marinescu 1'"
and, considering that the dog catchers are already in action all over Romania - at the order given by their Government - and are catching all dogs that they can get hold of and sometimes even owned dogs on private properties (gardens and yards) to take them to an "uncertain" destiny, we believe this to be unlawful.
QUESTION:
Can, and will, the EU-Commission help to shred some light into the matter as to which law is now the one that must be respected?
Can, and will, the EU-Commission help to restore the "order" in Romania if proven that the Romanian Government acts unlawfully?
To the COUNCIL OF EUROPE - regarding human rights violations and the safety of Romanian citizens:
We have seen people been arrested (already days before the vote on the new 'legislation'), we have seen dog catchers entering private properties and "stealing" owned companion animals, we have seen people being physically attacked by dog catchers when trying to defend their owned companion animals who they consider being part of their family, and we have (already) seen people (neighbors) killing each other. One just needs to check the Romanian news to find many cases, and one just needs to wait and watch while the death count gets higher. Or one can take action now and try to stop the anarchic madness.
And those who are not being physically aggressed are being forced to witness extreme cruelty to animals, and even to humans, on a daily basis, and to such an extent that they lose any good quality of life, and the feeling of being safe.
Experts have warned that exposure to abuse has an impact upon any individual who witnesses it, and that the exposure to uncontrolled animal abuse as happening right now in Romania, connects directly with children's psychological health. That children exposed to the capture and often immediate slaughter of the animals will seek to psychologically protect themselves from such trauma. They will desensitize. Reduce their sensitivity towards living creatures including fellow humans. Some will embrace the attributes of their violent society and finding legitimized sanction for the destruction of the animal sub-group, will also aggress against the animals.
QUESTIONS:
Can, and will, the Council of Europe intervene in trying to protect the safety and the human rights of Romania's citizens?
Can, and will, the Council of Europe intervene in order to protect Romania's children from psychological impairment due to the exposure of uncontrolled animal abuse?
To the COUNCIL OF EUROPE - regarding the 'European Council's Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals' and violations of said Convention:
Romania has signed said Convention on 23/06/2004 - has ratified it on 06/08/2004 - and it entered into force on 01/03/2005 - and in addition to this, Romania has also embraced parts of said Convention in their National Animal Protection Law 9/2008.
Being a signatory of the 'European Council's Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals', Romania had and still have a binding obligation to take adequate measures in the field of stray animal population control, including the housing and care of these animals.
As you know all of the before mentioned points of the Convention are NOT being respected.
QUESTIONS:
Can, and will, the Council of Europe take any measure to remind Romania of their binding obligations regarding the management of stray animal populations and the adequate care of these animals, among others?
Can, and will, the Council of Europe, please remind Romania that the 'European Council's Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals' is NOT an essentially cosmetic, futile, and very expensive useless piece of paper initiated at the expense of European tax payer's money, but without any value other than the paper on which it is being printed, and which can readily be dismissed?
To THE EUROPEAN ANTI-FRAUD OFFICE, and THE BELGIAN STATE SECRETARY FOR EUROPEAN AFFAIRS - regarding corruption, misuse and potentially misappropriation of public funds and EU-funds
ALL 'catch & kill' or 'catch & incarcerate & starve to death' policies have proven unsuccessful in Romania. The WHO clearly states that killing stray animals does not stop the problem and only offers a temporary “solution”. The World Health Organization’s “Guidelines for Dog Population Management” (Geneva 1990) and various other academic studies show that killing dogs is ineffective. Despite mass extermination campaigns by misguided municipalities the street dog population grows, and the best examples of both good and bad stray animal population control policies come from their own country:
In 2001, Traian Basescu, the then-mayor of Bucharest launched a campaign that led to the extermination of about 144,000 stray dogs in the capital alone, spending almost 9,000,000 Euros (62 Euros per dog) during the period from 2001-2007. Between 2008-2010, 20,000 dogs have been killed in Constanta spending 1,500,000 Euros (75 Euros per dog).
The only towns in Romania that used catch/neuter/release programs were Oradea and Lugoj, and the results are showing:
ORADEA
2006 – stray dog population: 4,000
2011 – stray dog population: 270
Costs incurred to spay/neuter a dog: 14 euro – program run and funded by Robert Smith - FPCC/Dog - Project Oradea, UK, in collaboration with city hall Oradea
LUGOJ
2008: 2,500 stray dogs
2011: 235 stray dogs
Costs to spay/neuter a dog: 12 euro – program run and funded by city hall Lugoj in collaboration with local animal welfare organization, Free Amely.
According to Princess Maja von Hohenzollern, Romania has killed an incredible 10 million stray dogs during the period from 2004 to 2009. That IS a 'genocide of dogs' that has never happened in Europe - and the entire world - before. Romania has killed almost as many dogs as the entire population of Romania with the only "result" that the streets of Romania are again (still) littered with live and dead dogs.
Overall it is estimated that Romania has spend between 25 and 40 million euros between 2001 and 2008 for the 'management' of the stray animals, while their numbers only grew larger!
Contrary to the popular belief that fuels the anti-stray protests, the money spent on food for the strays was just a infinitesimal part of the budget, as the dogs were being fed “subliminal” quantities, to quote the so called specialists from DSVA Brasov. Out of a total budget of 1,500,000 lei for 2008, the dog catchers in Brasov allocated only 5,000 lei for the dog food, less than 3%.
The stray dog business as a very lucrative business and by intentionally NOT taking the right decisions to solve the problem, the Romanian government supports the prosperity of a dirty industry in which many people (including mayors and other politicians who accept bribes) profit from:
the collecting of dogs
the construction of unnecessary shelters (including research and design)
the housing of animals, including supposedly feeding and caring of the animals
the incineration of the deceased animals
YES: "interestingly", even culling dogs can be very profitable. The President is therefore asking the tax payer to fund an expensive, non-evidence based, ineffective practice!
QUESTIONS:
Can, and will, the OLAF please investigate the correct (or fraudulent) use of public funds spent under the pretext of stray animals management in Romania? As you know best, Romania ranks high at the corruption-index and It has been suggested countless times by many Romanian organisations during the last years, that the money would disappear into the pockets of greedy, dishonest politicians, mayors and business men, but that the dogs would not benefit from the public money that is being spend for their supposed management and care. We have seen shelters where the dogs were not even given a drop of water all the while the municipality had spent gigantic sums for their "care".
Can, and will, the Belgian State Secretary for European Affairs please let us know if the European Union gives money for animal welfare to Romania and the exact amount? If that proves to be the case then an independent commission should be assigned to do a complete investigation as to the appropriation of these monies.
What could perhaps be happening is that money slated for animal welfare could very well be used for purposes other than it was intended maybe even for the personal gains of those individuals who advocate these atrocities. Misappropriation of money and falsification of documents to coverup such misappropriation is nothing new and has been uncovered in other countries of the Eastern Block. Such information, however, is usually covered up and a wall of silence is put up by methods of intimidation.
Thank you, in advance, for the time taken to read this, for considering our plea for help, and for answering our questions!
For and on behalf of Occupy for Animals and the signatories of this petition:
Pia Berrend / Founder at Occupy for Animals
www.occupyforanimals.org
occupyforanimals.wix.com/straysofeurope
Email: occupyforanimals@live.com
To:
The European Parliament
The European Commission
The Council of Europe
The European Ombudsman
The European Anti-Fraud Office
The Belgian State Secretary for European AffairsThe European Parliament's Intergroup on the Welfare and Conservation of Animals
Dear Sir / Madam,
On 10th September the Lower House of the Romanian Parliament voted GEO 155/2001 to legitimise a 'catch and kill' policy for all homeless animals. The terminology used during the debate at the parliament was 'eradication'. Since this date media frenzy has been created because of the death of a young boy under what remains dubious circumstances. However the stray animals were blamed and as a result of the media frenzy and the vote, a state of abuse of animals exists now in Romania. Animals and their owners and protectors were immediately, and still are, at serious risk. It must be remembered that many millions of Romanians are animal owners or protectors of the animals. This law has polarized Romania's society and made it dangerously divisive.
It had to be expected that millions of animal lovers would seek to protect their own animals or the animals they 'protect' on the streets. Millions! It had to be expected that half a country would seek to defend and protect, and that the other half would seek to aggress.
Not only would this policy, bring infamy to Romanian authorities and by association, with Romania, apparently ill considered was the fact that an 'eradication' strategy simply will not be successful. Owned dogs will continue to breed and thereby ensuring a plentiful and constant supply of animals on the streets. Occupy for Animals, along with many others, suggested and still maintains, that this is a desirable condition! If implemented, it would therefore be a futile and ineffective policy.
The 'Making The Link' Study and Project Group - a major collaboration of international organisations, academics and world leading experts in THE LINK between exposure to animal abuse and the resulting effect on children's psychological health and development, had warned the Romanian Constitutional Court that the implementation of GEO 155/2001 - their 'eradication' strategy, which can best be described as potentially 'the greatest animal genocidal impact on human health in European history' - would have a deleterious impact of the health of the children of Romania.
'Making The Link' - initiator Malcolm Plant (BSc, BA (Hons), MSc, Dipl Psych., Fellow of the Institute for Human-Animal Connection, University of Denver) wrote (among other):
"We would urge you to re-enforce your decision last year on precisely the same issue and with no additional changes to circumstances. Our concern is primarily for the health of the children which we will be measuring over the next few years. Academically we are anticipating hitherto profound impact on the children's health unseen in any previous study if you were to ratify the proposed amendments. As human beings, as parents, we are frightened about the effects if the new generation of Romanians are exposed to street horrors on a previously unprecedented scale."
On 25th September, 2013 Constitutional Court judge Petre Lazaroiu, suggested that "the mass killing of stray dogs in Romania could traumatize the population"... Then the entire place ruled to cull all dogs... and that the eradication of Romania's homeless animals - although it had been ruled unconstitutional in January 2012 - was now "constitutional"!
On 25th of September, the Romanian Constitutional Court had an opportunity to define whether Romania is a country worthy of being called civilized or whether it should be consigned to popular perception of a country unworthy of being considered anything other than barbaric, mismanaged, corrupt and dangerous. They chose the latter.
Their approval of, and the implementation of GEO 155/2001, has produced worldwide condemnation and a perception that Romania is a country which introduces medieval practices and governs in a draconian mode. Most of the 'civilized' countries have introduced a 'Catch, Neuter, Vaccinate and Return' policy and now have very few homeless animals on the streets. This is a 21st century methodology.
Not only have the Romanian Government dismissed the warnings expressed by the experts, and failed to acknowledge T-N-R as the only proven successful strategy to control and curb stray animal populations (in fact: ALL 'catch & kill' policies have historically proven unsuccessful) but being aware of the costs and profits to be made from implementing the proposed 'eradication' strategy, are aware that significant personal profits can be made through corrupt alliances.
The net result will be abject strategic failure and the number of animals will not decrease. Through corrupt alliances, personal profits from the animal corpse disposal will have been secured.
But the biggest cost is in the human domain. Children exposed to the capture and often immediate slaughter of the animals will seek to psychologically protect themselves from such trauma. They will desensitize. Reduce their sensitivity towards living creatures including fellow humans. Some will embrace the attributes of their violent society and finding legitimized sanction for the destruction of the animal sub-group, will also aggress against the animals.
There is then some inevitability that once such aggression is socially sanctioned, their journey will continue by aggressing against person, against property. They will see no distinction. Their journey can easily lead to the killing of another person. Significant research has identified this development and ending. This is the slow diminishment of a society's moral substance and gradual increase into a prevalence of violence but a more immediate but equally destructive effect can be seen.
In any society, irrespective of political dictats, there is no homogeneity of support. Emotive issues exacerbate differences. Any society will contain those who passionately support the rights of companion animals and also those who have no regard or who are motivated by political hysteria. At such levels of passion, in counterpoint to each other, this polarization can produce levels of acute violence. Neighbor against neighbor! Even before official recognition of the law in Romania, two neighbors have fought over this issue and one was killed. Even before! One can only stand and watch now and wait while the death count gets higher!
So we have a government introduced policy which at best is ill informed, historically proven to be unsuccessful with previously proven successful strategies dismissed. And on top of all, a strategy which will polarize society resulting in violence between citizens and almost as if to reinforce the evidence that the strategy is ill advised, ill considered and incompetent, the children will be psychologically damaged. One cannot conceive of a more counter productive, societally destructive direction taken by any European Union Member Government in recent times.
Additional information is compiled at:
http://www.occupyforanimals.org/romania--a-country-cries-out-for-revenge-after-the-tragic-death-of-a-four-year-old-boy-who-had-been-attacked-by-dogs.html
And:
http://www.occupyforanimals.org/romania---on-the-greatest-animal-genocide-in-european-history-government-initiated-anarchy-violations-of-human-rights-and-children-rights.html
Occupy for Animals is being bombarded with emails and calls from desperate Romanian animal activists and rescuers who are pleading for help!
Not only are their own companion animals, and/or the animals that are in the care of their organisations and who most certainly constitute no 'danger' to the public and who often even already have potential adopters (outside of Romania) at risk of being taken by the dog catchers and thrown in their so-called 'shelters' where death is a certainty and not an option, but the people, too, are at risk of being physically attacked!
And it's only the beginning!
Considering the scale of the tragedy that is already unfolding, the societal disaster along with the potentially 'greatest animal genocidal impact on human health in European history' that we are heading towards, we are respectfully begging for you to intervene and to help Romania to get back on track before it's too late!
In addition to our plea for help, we also have a few questions that we - together with very very many people from Europe and from all around the world - would really love to have an answer to.
Below, our questions, suggestions, and remarks.
To the EUROPEAN COMMISSION, the COUNCIL OF EUROPE, the EUROPEAN OMBUDSMAN, and the European Parliament's Intergroup on the Welfare and Conservation of Animals - regarding the new 'legislation':
Romania's Constitutional Court ruled on 25th September, 2013 that the proposal which had been accepted by the Lower House of the Romanian Parliament on 10th of September, 2013, is "constitutional" and that the 'euthanasia' of all homeless dogs in Romania, after 14 days spent in their so-called 'shelters if not adopted or perished before this time has elapsed, is 'constitutional', too, although they had ruled in January 2012, that: "the killing of healthy animals was unconstitutional as a mean to control stray animal populations until all other solutions had been applied".
What has changed since January 2012 on the "management" of Romania's stray animals populations?
We haven't heard of any massive sterilization campaigns!
We haven't heard of any 'education of the populace regarding the importance of spay & neuter' their owned (but allowed to roam freely and to mate as they wish) companion animals! And in this context, we would like to remind you that an estimated 5 million puppies are born each year in Romania in rural areas of which some are being killed by their owners, and the others are simply being thrown out on the streets or in the woods.
We haven't heard of any measures taken to undermine breeding, including "back yard breeding"!
To the European Parliament's Intergroup on the Welfare and Conservation of Animals - regarding the before mentioned points:
Can, and will, the European Parliament's Intergroup on the Conservation and Welfare of Animals, please ask Mrs Daciana Sarbu - Vice President of the Intergroup, co-initiator of the Written Declaration on Dog Population Management 0026/2011, wife of Romania's Prime Minister Victor Ponta - what she has done in her own country to promote and implement a humane management of the stray animals populations as she has so brightly described in the WD 0026/2011?
Please ask Mrs Sarbu what she has done to promote responsible animal ownership in her own country?
Please ask Mrs Sarbu what she has done to educate the populace of Romania about the importance of spay and neuter, and/or not to let their animals roam freely and to mate as they wish?
Please ask Mrs Sarbu what she has done to avoid the tragedy that is now unfolding, bringing unnecessary suffering and death to both animals and their protectors?
As the wife of Romania's Prime Minister Vîctor Ponta, and a Vice President of the Intergroup, she had, and still has a unique position and opportunity to bring change to her country regarding stray animals population control and welfare, but we haven't - sadly and to our very great deception - heard of any actions taken by Mrs Sarbu in this field. In fact, we haven't heard anything from her since the adoption of WD0026/2011.
The questions might be, and probably are, irrelevant because they simply won't change a thing to the situation of the poor homeless dogs in Romania, but we really would love to know her, and/or your answer to our questions. In fact, we are sure that very very many people are interested in knowing the answers to these reasonable and justified questions.
Also, with the speech that Mrs Sarbu has given at the Intergroup-meeting from 12th of September, 2013, her totally misinformed and erroneous statements self-declared her as being unfit for office as either a member of the Intergroup, let alone as Vice President. Please, download and listen to said speech at the following link:
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B_iBJnK4Nmk1ZjhFYl9tMVNmU0k/edit
In light of the surprisingly misinformed content of the presentation by Mme Sarbu and her continued absence from Intergroup involvement especially when a serious focus is placed on her country, we would reserve the right to further explore Mme Sarbu's suitability for office and we are sure that you would encourage any adverse detail to be presented, as you of course only want officials who exemplify the highest quality in seeking the best of interest for the animals and people of Europe.
Can the Intergroup please advise us as to who to complain to if someone is failing in his/her duty as regards to the position he/she, maybe now un-deservingly, finds himself/herself in?
To the EUROPEAN COMMISSION, the COUNCIL OF EUROPE, and the EUROPEAN OMBUDSMAN - regarding the new 'legislation':
Former senator Marius Marinescu, president of the Romanian Animal Protection Association FPAM, and initiator of the Law 'Marinescu 1' commonly known as Law 9/2008, officially stated that:
"LAW NO. 9/2008 (Law MARINESCU 1) remains in force. Euthanasia is prohibited.
And that:
Article 7 index 1 of the Act provides: "It is forbidden to euthanize dogs, cats and other animals, except animals with incurable diseases identified by the veterinarian."
and that:
GEO (Government Emergency Ordinance) 155/2001 concerning euthanasia, approved on 10 September, 2013 by the Parliament, does not repeal the law 'Marinescu 1'"
and, considering that the dog catchers are already in action all over Romania - at the order given by their Government - and are catching all dogs that they can get hold of and sometimes even owned dogs on private properties (gardens and yards) to take them to an "uncertain" destiny, we believe this to be unlawful.
QUESTION:
Can, and will, the EU-Commission help to shred some light into the matter as to which law is now the one that must be respected?
Can, and will, the EU-Commission help to restore the "order" in Romania if proven that the Romanian Government acts unlawfully?
To the COUNCIL OF EUROPE - regarding human rights violations and the safety of Romanian citizens:
We have seen people been arrested (already days before the vote on the new 'legislation'), we have seen dog catchers entering private properties and "stealing" owned companion animals, we have seen people being physically attacked by dog catchers when trying to defend their owned companion animals who they consider being part of their family, and we have (already) seen people (neighbors) killing each other. One just needs to check the Romanian news to find many cases, and one just needs to wait and watch while the death count gets higher. Or one can take action now and try to stop the anarchic madness.
And those who are not being physically aggressed are being forced to witness extreme cruelty to animals, and even to humans, on a daily basis, and to such an extent that they lose any good quality of life, and the feeling of being safe.
Experts have warned that exposure to abuse has an impact upon any individual who witnesses it, and that the exposure to uncontrolled animal abuse as happening right now in Romania, connects directly with children's psychological health. That children exposed to the capture and often immediate slaughter of the animals will seek to psychologically protect themselves from such trauma. They will desensitize. Reduce their sensitivity towards living creatures including fellow humans. Some will embrace the attributes of their violent society and finding legitimized sanction for the destruction of the animal sub-group, will also aggress against the animals.
QUESTIONS:
Can, and will, the Council of Europe intervene in trying to protect the safety and the human rights of Romania's citizens?
Can, and will, the Council of Europe intervene in order to protect Romania's children from psychological impairment due to the exposure of uncontrolled animal abuse?
To the COUNCIL OF EUROPE - regarding the 'European Council's Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals' and violations of said Convention:
Romania has signed said Convention on 23/06/2004 - has ratified it on 06/08/2004 - and it entered into force on 01/03/2005 - and in addition to this, Romania has also embraced parts of said Convention in their National Animal Protection Law 9/2008.
Being a signatory of the 'European Council's Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals', Romania had and still have a binding obligation to take adequate measures in the field of stray animal population control, including the housing and care of these animals.
As you know all of the before mentioned points of the Convention are NOT being respected.
QUESTIONS:
Can, and will, the Council of Europe take any measure to remind Romania of their binding obligations regarding the management of stray animal populations and the adequate care of these animals, among others?
Can, and will, the Council of Europe, please remind Romania that the 'European Council's Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals' is NOT an essentially cosmetic, futile, and very expensive useless piece of paper initiated at the expense of European tax payer's money, but without any value other than the paper on which it is being printed, and which can readily be dismissed?
To THE EUROPEAN ANTI-FRAUD OFFICE, and THE BELGIAN STATE SECRETARY FOR EUROPEAN AFFAIRS - regarding corruption, misuse and potentially misappropriation of public funds and EU-funds
ALL 'catch & kill' or 'catch & incarcerate & starve to death' policies have proven unsuccessful in Romania. The WHO clearly states that killing stray animals does not stop the problem and only offers a temporary “solution”. The World Health Organization’s “Guidelines for Dog Population Management” (Geneva 1990) and various other academic studies show that killing dogs is ineffective. Despite mass extermination campaigns by misguided municipalities the street dog population grows, and the best examples of both good and bad stray animal population control policies come from their own country:
In 2001, Traian Basescu, the then-mayor of Bucharest launched a campaign that led to the extermination of about 144,000 stray dogs in the capital alone, spending almost 9,000,000 Euros (62 Euros per dog) during the period from 2001-2007. Between 2008-2010, 20,000 dogs have been killed in Constanta spending 1,500,000 Euros (75 Euros per dog).
The only towns in Romania that used catch/neuter/release programs were Oradea and Lugoj, and the results are showing:
ORADEA
2006 – stray dog population: 4,000
2011 – stray dog population: 270
Costs incurred to spay/neuter a dog: 14 euro – program run and funded by Robert Smith - FPCC/Dog - Project Oradea, UK, in collaboration with city hall Oradea
LUGOJ
2008: 2,500 stray dogs
2011: 235 stray dogs
Costs to spay/neuter a dog: 12 euro – program run and funded by city hall Lugoj in collaboration with local animal welfare organization, Free Amely.
According to Princess Maja von Hohenzollern, Romania has killed an incredible 10 million stray dogs during the period from 2004 to 2009. That IS a 'genocide of dogs' that has never happened in Europe - and the entire world - before. Romania has killed almost as many dogs as the entire population of Romania with the only "result" that the streets of Romania are again (still) littered with live and dead dogs.
Overall it is estimated that Romania has spend between 25 and 40 million euros between 2001 and 2008 for the 'management' of the stray animals, while their numbers only grew larger!
Contrary to the popular belief that fuels the anti-stray protests, the money spent on food for the strays was just a infinitesimal part of the budget, as the dogs were being fed “subliminal” quantities, to quote the so called specialists from DSVA Brasov. Out of a total budget of 1,500,000 lei for 2008, the dog catchers in Brasov allocated only 5,000 lei for the dog food, less than 3%.
The stray dog business as a very lucrative business and by intentionally NOT taking the right decisions to solve the problem, the Romanian government supports the prosperity of a dirty industry in which many people (including mayors and other politicians who accept bribes) profit from:
the collecting of dogs
the construction of unnecessary shelters (including research and design)
the housing of animals, including supposedly feeding and caring of the animals
the incineration of the deceased animals
YES: "interestingly", even culling dogs can be very profitable. The President is therefore asking the tax payer to fund an expensive, non-evidence based, ineffective practice!
QUESTIONS:
Can, and will, the OLAF please investigate the correct (or fraudulent) use of public funds spent under the pretext of stray animals management in Romania? As you know best, Romania ranks high at the corruption-index and It has been suggested countless times by many Romanian organisations during the last years, that the money would disappear into the pockets of greedy, dishonest politicians, mayors and business men, but that the dogs would not benefit from the public money that is being spend for their supposed management and care. We have seen shelters where the dogs were not even given a drop of water all the while the municipality had spent gigantic sums for their "care".
Can, and will, the Belgian State Secretary for European Affairs please let us know if the European Union gives money for animal welfare to Romania and the exact amount? If that proves to be the case then an independent commission should be assigned to do a complete investigation as to the appropriation of these monies.
What could perhaps be happening is that money slated for animal welfare could very well be used for purposes other than it was intended maybe even for the personal gains of those individuals who advocate these atrocities. Misappropriation of money and falsification of documents to coverup such misappropriation is nothing new and has been uncovered in other countries of the Eastern Block. Such information, however, is usually covered up and a wall of silence is put up by methods of intimidation.
Thank you, in advance, for the time taken to read this, for considering our plea for help, and for answering our questions!
For and on behalf of Occupy for Animals and the signatories of this petition:
Pia Berrend / Founder at Occupy for Animals
www.occupyforanimals.org
occupyforanimals.wix.com/straysofeurope
Email: occupyforanimals@live.com
To:
Mrs Erminia Mazzoni, Chair of the Committee on Petitions at the European Parliament
The European Commission, José Manuel Barroso, President of the EU-Commission
The European Ombudsman
OLAF - The European Anti-Fraud Office
Mr Olivier Chastel, The Belgian State Secretary for European Affairs
Catherine Ashton, EU-Commissioner for Human Rights
Mr Erler, The European Parliament's Intergroup on the Welfare and Conservation of Animals
Mr Andrea Zanoni, The European Parliament's Intergroup on the Welfare and Conservation of Animals
Mrs Erminia Mazzoni, Chair of the Committee on Petitions at the European Parliament
The European Commission, José Manuel Barroso, President of the EU-Commission
The European Ombudsman
OLAF - The European Anti-Fraud Office
Mr Olivier Chastel, The Belgian State Secretary for European Affairs
Catherine Ashton, EU-Commissioner for Human Rights
Mr Erler, The European Parliament's Intergroup on the Welfare and Conservation of Animals
Mr Andrea Zanoni, The European Parliament's Intergroup on the Welfare and Conservation of Animals
Please take action regarding Romania, a European country challenging Europe!
Dear Sir / Madam,
On 10th September the Lower House of the Romanian Parliament voted GEO 155/200 to legitimise a 'catch and kill' policy for all homeless animals. The terminology used during the debate at the parliament was 'eradication'. Since this date media frenzy has been created because of the death of a young...
Dear Sir / Madam,
On 10th September the Lower House of the Romanian Parliament voted GEO 155/200 to legitimise a 'catch and kill' policy for all homeless animals. The terminology used during the debate at the parliament was 'eradication'. Since this date media frenzy has been created because of the death of a young...
marți, 1 octombrie 2013
U.S. bankruptcy
Midnight ( 7:00 GMT) : U.S. White House ordered federal agencies to halt activities due to lack of budget. America has no money !
800,000 civil servants ( from 2 million ) will go forced unpaid leave . The first step before dismissal.
President Obama immediately send a video message from the Department of Defense military and civilian , to assure them that they will be paid normally.
Congress adopt an emergency he text ensures that the military will be paid on time and without delay , whatever happens .
Washington Post Live submit falling U.S. :
What say common sense ?
Politicians shaking their ass by a military coup .
America has 2 million civil servants to 316 million. And give out 800,000 overnight . Romania has 1.5 to 15 million people ( as both have really left the country ) . And struggling for three years , to lay off ... 12,000 officers . No comment .
3 years ago , in 2010, I wrote that all this will happen : Wake up , the crisis has just begun ! Comes an economic apocalypse ! . Fools laughed . Basescu said, let us press her apocalypses . All had the impression that the loans would go on forever . Like drunks selling their house instead seize the job .
How stupid to be, so you think you can live without guilt bill?
What does Barack Obama ?
What will all politrucii , worldwide : more loans. More taxes . That money by force . Now , at once, immediately . Does it go head to produce money.
What will the Republicans ?
Stop lending . They say that the U.S. is already in the gulf and the loans do not solve anything, if the economy does not start again.
And American companies can not compete with the Chinese , without deducting taxes and without removing unions.
But the economy can not be restored overnight. It takes years. The crisis is not a cold to go with an aspirin . Even if lower taxes today and completely prohibit unions , America will be required to pay at least 10 years of suffering , terrible unemployment and recession .
And with America , around the world. What you saw in Detroit ( abandoned houses , unpaid pensions , a ghost town ) will spread like ringworm , and in your town .
You did not think that America is dying and escape Romania ?
House prices will collapse ( already started ) .
Wages will not be paid for months . Neither the state nor private .
You looking for work and you will not find anywhere.
Without wages and taxes will not be money for retirement .
Food prices will be more than your pockets . If you're lucky , you will work for daily bread .
Do you have money to heat and light . No discussion about on the internet.
Looting will multiply . Street demonstrations will be more violent . Policy , no way . Start chaos .
Emigration will explode. But Romanians will be forcibly sent back .
Welcome to hell , dear readers. If you are strong enough to get cured .
If not, not .
Câinii fără stăpân din Leleşti, împuşcaţi la marginea comunei
Primarul
din comuna Lelești, Marian Rotaru, a rezolvat problema câinilor fără
stăpân. Acesta a făcut solicitare la Agenție Județeană pentru Vânători
și Pescari să împuște patrupedele. Marian Rotaru se plânge de faptul că
foarte mulți câini ajung la Lelești de la groapa de gunoi a Municipiului
Târgu-Jiu de la Bârsești sau sunt aduși cu mașinile.
Autoritățile locale din comuna Lelești au găsit soluția să scape de câinii fără stăpân. Fără prea mari bătăi de cap, patrupedele au fost date pe mâna vânătorilor care au împușcat toţi maidanezii de pe câmpurile și din pădurile din comună. În felul acesta maidanezii nu au ajuns în sat și nu au făcut victime. „La noi ajung câinii de la groapa de gunoi a municipiului Târgu-Jiu care este la Bârsești. Pentru că nu au ce mânca pleacă prin păduri și se apropie foarte mult de sat. Am rezolvat cu cei de la AJVPS pentru că le-am solicitat sprijinul și câinii fără zgardă au fost împușcați sau nu știu ce au făcut. Cert e că nu mai sunt. Se postaseră pe lângă școli și noi i-am scos în câmp, iar de acolo s-au ocupat vânătorii. Câinii fără stăpân prinși pe fondul de vânătoare sunt împușcați, că atacă vânatul. Nu știu câți câini au fost”, a declarat Marian Rotaru, primarul din comuna Lelești.
Câinii sunt aduși cu mașinile la Lelești
Primarul din comuna Lelești a fost sesizat de către cetățeni că maidanezii sunt aduși cu mașini în localitate. Marian Rotaru a luat legătura cu autoritățile de la Târgu-Jiu pentru a descuraja acest fenomen. „Mi-au spus cetățenii că au văzut de mai multe ori mașini din care sunt descărcați câini. Eu am luat legătura cu cei de la Primăria Târgu-Jiu, cu cei de la Edilitara și mi-au zis că daca mai vedem mașini care descarcă maidanezi să-i anunțăm și ei vor interveni să vadă care este situația”, a mai precizat Marian Rotaru.
Autoritățile locale din comuna Lelești au găsit soluția să scape de câinii fără stăpân. Fără prea mari bătăi de cap, patrupedele au fost date pe mâna vânătorilor care au împușcat toţi maidanezii de pe câmpurile și din pădurile din comună. În felul acesta maidanezii nu au ajuns în sat și nu au făcut victime. „La noi ajung câinii de la groapa de gunoi a municipiului Târgu-Jiu care este la Bârsești. Pentru că nu au ce mânca pleacă prin păduri și se apropie foarte mult de sat. Am rezolvat cu cei de la AJVPS pentru că le-am solicitat sprijinul și câinii fără zgardă au fost împușcați sau nu știu ce au făcut. Cert e că nu mai sunt. Se postaseră pe lângă școli și noi i-am scos în câmp, iar de acolo s-au ocupat vânătorii. Câinii fără stăpân prinși pe fondul de vânătoare sunt împușcați, că atacă vânatul. Nu știu câți câini au fost”, a declarat Marian Rotaru, primarul din comuna Lelești.
Câinii sunt aduși cu mașinile la Lelești
Primarul din comuna Lelești a fost sesizat de către cetățeni că maidanezii sunt aduși cu mașini în localitate. Marian Rotaru a luat legătura cu autoritățile de la Târgu-Jiu pentru a descuraja acest fenomen. „Mi-au spus cetățenii că au văzut de mai multe ori mașini din care sunt descărcați câini. Eu am luat legătura cu cei de la Primăria Târgu-Jiu, cu cei de la Edilitara și mi-au zis că daca mai vedem mașini care descarcă maidanezi să-i anunțăm și ei vor interveni să vadă care este situația”, a mai precizat Marian Rotaru.
duminică, 29 septembrie 2013
Law approving the mass euthanasia of dogs may be repealed, if we have at least 50 000 signatures.
Internet petitions are not valid, we need actual signatures on identical tables.
We gather signatures in the street.
The table should include: name, address, serial number identification, signature.
So gather all the signatures will be working on a draft law on the issue of stray dogs, it can come with real solutions, not criminal solutions.
Those who work in the legal field, I can contact to put you in touch with other lawyers who want to participate in developing this project.
To look just like these dogs can be maintained without too much expense, you can contact various food factories and commercial complexes that can donate foods that expire or are about to expire.
If anyone can translate this message into the main European languages would be great.
The signatures are not valid abroad to repeal the law, just as support.
We must have signatures from each county. Each volunteer must organize a campaign of which the county.
In two weeks max, I'll know where to send all signatures tables.
And the message to be sent abroad, signatures coming from each country will be on separate sheets. Thank you!
Internet petitions are not valid, we need actual signatures on identical tables.
We gather signatures in the street.
The table should include: name, address, serial number identification, signature.
So gather all the signatures will be working on a draft law on the issue of stray dogs, it can come with real solutions, not criminal solutions.
Those who work in the legal field, I can contact to put you in touch with other lawyers who want to participate in developing this project.
To look just like these dogs can be maintained without too much expense, you can contact various food factories and commercial complexes that can donate foods that expire or are about to expire.
If anyone can translate this message into the main European languages would be great.
The signatures are not valid abroad to repeal the law, just as support.
We must have signatures from each county. Each volunteer must organize a campaign of which the county.
In two weeks max, I'll know where to send all signatures tables.
And the message to be sent abroad, signatures coming from each country will be on separate sheets. Thank you!
sâmbătă, 28 septembrie 2013
A HOME euthanize dogs in ROMANIA! 2013 EU WHY ARE followers of these practices do nothing???
miercuri, 25 septembrie 2013
ZIUAnews vă prezintă în exclusivitate legăturile între bani și discursurile politice în cazul Ionuț Anghel Moartea lui Ionuţ, manipulată politic de PDL, împotriva lui Sorin Oprescu
Moartea copilului Ionuț Anghel nu a
determinat unitate între liderii politici și administrativi, pentru a
lua măsurile necesare ca astfel de tragedii să nu se mai întâmple
niciodată și pentru ca vinovații să fie pedepsiți • Dimpotrivă, a fost
un pretext pentru asasinarea mediatică a opozanților politici • Tatăl
lui Ionuț, care a făcut afaceri până în 2008, prin firmele sale, cu
Primăria condusă de Adriean Videanu, a susținut că responsabil este
primarul general actual, Sorin Oprescu • Liderii PDL și mass-media
fidele acestora au manipulat politic și mediatic tragedia lui Ionuț
Anghel, copilul despre care se presupune că și-a pierdut viața mâncat de
câini în Sectorul 2 al Capitalei • Șefii PDL l-au pus la zid pe
primarul general, Sorin Oprescu, ultimul vinovat în această tragedie, și
i-au cerut demisia • Opinia publică a fost instigată să iasă în stradă
pentru a scăpa de maidanezi • Strigătele oamenilor s-au transformat în
slogane PDL, ei uitând că, de fapt, câinii erau adoptați, iar tragedia a
avut loc pe o proprietate privată
Moartea lui Ionuț Anghel, copilul de
patru ani mâncat de câini pe un teren din București, în apropierea
Parcului Tei, a scos la iveală amănunte crunte despre manipulările la
care sunt capabili să recurgă oamenii politici pentru a-și redobândi
puterea și despre cum sfârșitul tragic al unui copil poate fi folosit
pentru asasinarea politică și mediatică a unui primar. De asemenea,
moartea lui Ionuț dezvăluie neputința autorităților judiciare în astfel
de cazuri, incapacitatea lor de a conduce o anchetă complexă și care să
servească aflării adevărului și, mai ales, pedepsirii celor vinovați.
ZIUAnews vă prezintă o radiografie a
modului în care au încercat liderii PDL să se derobeze de orice
responsabilitate și să îl învinuiască exclusiv pe primarul Sorin Oprescu
de această tragedie, dar și a relațiilor de afaceri dintre familia
copilului ucis de câini și Primăria Generală pe vremea când era condusă
de Videanu. De asemenea, vă arătăm erorile comise de anchetatori și
modul bizar în care au reacționat autoritățile.
Luni, 2 septembrie, televiziunile,
citând surse din Poliție, au anunțat moartea unui copil în Parcul Tei,
mușcat de câinii maidanezi, și rănirea fratelui său mai mare. Surse din
Poliție au depănat rapid o poveste care s-a dovedit, ulterior, a fi
găunoasă: copiii se aflau în parcul Tei cu bunica lor, care i-a scăpat
din ochi câteva minute, tragedia s-a petrecut chiar la ieșirea din parc,
pe un teren viran, bunica a anunțat la 112, la ora 12.32 că i-au
dispărut copiii, la 12.36 poliția a ajuns la fața locului, unde a aflat
că unul dintre copii a fost ucis, iar celălalt a fost adus înapoi la
bunică de un individ la acea dată neidentificat. Copilul îi spune
individului că s-a pierdut și că vrea să ajungă la bunica sa, care e în
parc. Trece, în drumul său spre bunică, pe lângă un maidanez, dar
copilul nu reacționează în niciun fel, deși tocmai își văzuse fratele
ucis de maidanezi.
Polițiștii anunțaseră, pe surse, că
fratele cel mare a fost mușcat de maidanezi, de picior, dar a reușit să
scape. Imaginile cu fratele lui Ionuț după atac nu arată că Andrei ar
avea vreo rană.
Polițiștii sosiți la fața locului,
împreună cu Andrei Anghel, fratele mai mare al copilului ucis, ajung la
locul unde se presupune că s-a petrecut atacul, adică la un kilometru de
parc, la finalul unei râpe aproape imposibil de parcurs chiar și de un
om matur. Deși Andrei era dezorientat și se presupune că nu a știut
drumul de la locul atacului până în parc, invers a reușit să le arate
polițiștilor traseul.
Primăria Sectorului 2 comunică public,
la mai puțin de trei ore de la incident, că, în fapt, copilul nu a fost
omorât în parc, ci pe un teren proprietate privată, și dă și adresa:
Tuzla 50. "Referitor la tragicul accident în care şi-a pierdut viaţa un
copil, fiind muşcat de un câine, Primăria Sectorului 2 precizează că
acest incident a avut loc pe un teren proprietate privată". Reacția
celor conduși de Neculai Onțanu a fost cel puțin ciudată, cu atât mai
mult cu cât niciun anchetator nu spusese dacă locul unde a fost găsit
copilul este locul în care acesta a fost ucis. Deși s-a disculpat,
Onțanu a anunțat ulterior că îi va demite pe șeful Poliției Locale și pe
o angajată de la Protecția Copilului.
Câteva ore mai târziu, presa, alături de
echipaje ale ISU, ambulanță și poliție, se aflau la mai bine de un
kilometru de parc, pe un teren proprietate privată. Așteptau să apară
cei de la ASPA, pentru a ridica animalele. Trupul copilului zăcea pe
caldarâm.
Apar angajații ASPA, care ridică cei
șase câini aflați pe terenul din Tuzla 50. Reprezentantul ASPA, Răzvan
Băncescu, susţine că patrupedele ridicate sunt cele care l-au ucis pe
copil, deși ancheta politiției nu era nici pe departe finalizată, nici
măcar declarații preliminare nu erau luate! "Am fost acolo cu două
echipe din cele trei pe care le avem și am capturat toți cei șase câini
care formau haita ce a atacat copilul. Câinii vor fi ținuți într-un
adăpost aflat în Sectorul 2 timp de 14 zile, până termină Poliția
ancheta, vor fi cercetați și supusi unor investigații. Comportamentul a
fost tipic de haită, un singur câine a fost mai agresiv. Urmează să
vedem ce probleme au", a conchis Băncescu.
Câinii sunt ridicați, bunica este dusă
la Secția 7 la audieri, unde ajunge și tatăl copilului, care se întoarce
apoi în parc pentru a-și identifica băiețelul. Deși copilul avea sute
de mușcături pe trup, era scalpat și desfigurat, tatăl său a reușit,
totuși, să îl identifice.
Angajații IML ridică trupul copilului,
pentru autopsie. Încep declarațiile politice împotriva lui Sorin
Oprescu, care s-ar face vinovat că nu a ridicat câinii comunitari "de pe
străzi". PDL cere demisia lui Oprescu, presa portocalie anunță
dezvăluiri senzaționale despre cât cheltuie primăria cu câinii,
ONG-urile sunt trase, de-a valma, la răspundere publică.
Apare informația conform căreia câinii
găsiți în Tuzla 50 ar fi fost adoptați, în 2008 de asociația
Caleidoscop, condusă de Carmen Secăreanu, pe semnătura unei voluntare.
Secăreanu dispare, la fel și adăpostul de câini pe care susținea că îl
are, este găsită, după câteva zile, voluntara, care spune public că nu
are nicio vină și că semnătura ei nu înseamnă că și-a asumat adopția
câinelui. Deși câinii erau adoptați legal, oamenii amenință cu
mitinguri, ieșiri în stradă, pentru că sunt câini maidanezi. Vinovat:
Oprescu!
Dosarul penal de ucidere din culpă este
înregistrat la Parchetul Capitalei, dar preluat a doua zi de Parchetul
General, fiind desemnat un procuror "celebru" pentru că a reușit să îl
vâre după gratii pe Cioacă - Romulus Varga. Încep audierile, cu grămada.
Răzvan Băncescu, reprezentantul ASPA,
este audiat la Parchetul General, la fel bunica și părinții lui Ionuț,
la fel și voluntara care luase câinele pe semnătură, la fel și Carmen
Secăreanu. Deși procurorul știa din acte cine avea paza juridică a
câinilor și, ca atare, cine poartă răspunderea penală pentru ceea ce s-a
întâmplat, Secăreanu este lăsată să plece fără să fie măcar urmărită
penal și dispare din București.
Procurorul e nelămurit, presa citează
surse chipurile judiciare și aruncă pe piață bomba - au fost făcute
analize ADN care demonstrează că nu maidanezii l-au omorât pe Ionuț.
Numai că analizele pentru a identifica animalele care l-au mușcat nu
există. Cum au intuit autoritățile că animalele din Tuzla 50 au fost
implicate în vreun fel în moartea lui Ionuț? S-au uitat la blana lor,
animalul alb avea sânge pe bot și a fost catalogat drept câine criminal,
la cei cu blana neagră nu s-a văzut sângele, dar erau în curte și, ca
atare, au fost luați la grămadă.
Polițiștii susțin că au realizat
reconstituirea, dar, în continuare, nu le este clar cum au ajuns copiii
la un kilometru depărtare de parc, pe drum accidentat. La câteva zile de
la reconstituire, polițiștii merg iarăși la fața locului, după ce presa
anunță că s-a descoperit cadavrul unui câine de luptă care se dovedește
a fi maidanez.
Presa publică imagini cu Andrei și Ionuț
care se alergau în parc, în ziua tragediei. Bunica susține că de obicei
copiii mergeau în Cișmigiu, și că au descoperit Parcul Tei duminică, cu
o zi înaintea tragediei, când ea a mers numai cu Ionuț la plimbare. Pe
puținele imagini surprinse în parc în ziua tragediei, date de presă, pe
care procurorul Romulus Varga nu le-a considerat suficient de importante
pentru a fi ridicate, apare martorul neidentificat. Zile în șir, presa
se întreabă de ce se ascunde omul. În final, luni, acesta apare și este
audiat la Parchetul General. După ce își termină declarația dată
procurorului, martorul anunță că de-o săptămână s-a prezentat la
poliție, dar a fost ignorat. Asta până când procurorul a înțeles că îl
va găsi presa mai repede.
Spiritele sunt în continuare inflamate
de medicul legist Abdo Salem. Acesta susține că Ionuț a murit din cauza
hemoragiei masive, la care se pot adăuga frica și durerea ca factori de
stres și cere autorităților să rezolve problema maidanezilor, susținând
că a văzut oameni uciși și mâncați efectiv de câini.
Bunica și părinții micuțului Ionuț
participă la emisiuni televizate. Sunt calmi, nu trădează revoltă, par a
fi uniți, nu se învinovățesc unul pe altul sau pe bunică, vorbesc
continuu despre vina autorităților și despre sacrificiul făcut de copil,
ca și cum ar fi acceptat demult tragicul eveniment. "Cea mai mare
pedeapsă pentru autorități este să rezolve problema câinilor vagabonzi",
acestea sunt cuvintele pe care tatăl lui Ionuț le repetă obsesiv, după
ce anunță că se va duce la mitingul împotriva maidanezilor. La miting,
părinții sunt aplaudați ca și cum ar fi devenit lideri. Nu se dau în
spate, rămân printre oameni.
Oprescu, somat de PDL să demisioneze
Chiar în ziua tragediei, ca la un
semnal, lideri importanți ai PDL au ieșit la televizor și au cerut
imperios demisia primarului general Sorin Oprescu, identificat deja de
ei ca fiind unicul responsabil. Declarațiile erau care mai de care mai
dure, la adresa edilului general.
PDL București a ieșit imediat, prin
vocea purtătorului său de cuvânt și a cerut demisia lui Oprescu. "Un
copil a fost omorât de câini, e o tragedie care nu poate fi comentată
politic, programul de gestionare a câinilor fără stăpân este în
atributul Primăriei Captialei, astfel încât PDL București cere demisia
imediată a primarului Capitalei", a spus Mihai Atănăsoaiei, fost prefect
din Guvernul Boc.
Fostul edil al Capitalei, Adriean
Videanu, a fost printre primii care a transmis populației mesajul de
solidaritate în acțiuni contra maidanezilor, primul care s-a poziționat,
alături de PDL, declarativ, de partea cetățenilor și împotriva lui
Oprescu. Fostul edil a susținut că PDL este alături de cetățeni în
intenția lor de a strânge semnături pentru eutanasierea maidanezilor.
Videanu chiar s-a lăudat că, la finalul
mandatului său, i-a lăsat lui Oprescu un adăpost de câini pe care
actualul edil nu îl utilizează la capacitatea maximă. Ce a omis Videanu
să spună e că adăpostul este într-o continuă modernizare și existența sa
nu rezolvă problema câinilor maidanezi. "În legătură cu rezolvarea
problemei câinilor fără stăpân, vă amintesc că i-am predat la cheie lui
Sorin Oprescu singurul adăpost de câini, care în prezent este utilizat
la 10-12% din capacitatea lui (...) incompetenţa administrativă a lui
Sorin Oprescu este dublată de minciuni ale primului ministru", arătând
căVictor Ponta poate, "dacă doreşte", să creeze cadrul legal pentru
gestionarea câinilor fără stăpân, printr-o ordonanţă. De altfel, acesta a
fost și discursul președintelui Traian Băsescu, fost primar al
Capitalei, câteva zile mai târziu.
Declarațiile lui Videanu au fost
preluate de mass-media fidele PDL-ului, de unde și o serie de "anchete
jurnalistice" care devoalau modul neprofesionist în care sunt cheltuiți
banii publici în problema câinilor maidanezi. Singurul vinovat, Oprescu.
Videanu și Băsescu au fost urmați în declarații de Vasile Blaga,
președintele PDL, care susținea că "este absolut imperios necesar" ca
primarul general al Capitalei, Sorin Oprescu, să își dea demisia, și că
nu este nevoie de un referendum pentru ca populația să decidă dacă să
fie sau nu eutanasiați câinii maidanezi, ci "dacă populația din
București îl mai vrea sau nu" pe Sorin Oprescu primar general. Atacurile
lansate de Blaga inițial numai la adresa lui Oprescu au continuat cu
bătaie la USL, președintele PDL acuzând coaliția de la guvernare că a
blocat legea care rezolva problema câinilor fără stăpân propusă de
Guvernul Boc.
Udrea îl acuză pe Oprescu de iresponsabilitate
Deși a stat lângă doi primari ai
Capitalei care nu au rezolvat problema câinilor maidanezi, Traian
Băsescu și Adriean Videanu, fosta blondă de la Cotroceni, Elena Udrea, a
declarat, la postul preferat de PDL, B1 TV, că numai Oprescu e de vină
și că este un iresponsabil care pune interesele sale mai presus de cele
ale populației."Eu cred că trebuia să-și dea demisia. De mult trebuia
să-și dea demisia Sorin Oprescu, dar mai ales în ultima situație
generată de moartea acelui copil, mâncat de câini în parc. Nu se poate,
un primar care a avut posibilitatea și susținerea noastră să promoveze o
lege prin care, în Capitală, să se rezolve problema câinilor vagabonzi,
a ajuns în situația în care orașul condus de el un copil este mâncat de
câini. Iar el nici măcar nu era în țară. Mi-am amintit că el nu era în
țară nici atunci când au ars copiii aceia la Maternitatea de la
Giulești. (...) Asta este dovadă de iresponsabilitate și calcule
politice care pun înaintea interesului comunității pe care o conduci
interesul personal al domnului Oprescu de a rămâne în această funcție,
deși nu a făcut nimic ca primar. Îmi pare rău că bucureștenii l-au votat
într-un procent atât de mare", a conchis Udrea.
Edilul șef al Capitalei, făcut criminal de Macovei
Europarlamentarul Monica Macovei a fost
una dintre piesele de bază ale PDL aruncate în lupta împotriva lui
Oprescu, pe cadavrul lui Ionuț Anghel. Aceasta a susținut că Oprescu
este singurul responsabil de această tragedie. "Oprescu trebuie să își
dea demisia din funcția de primar pentru că 6 ani nu a făcut nimic
pentru a preveni uciderea lui Ionuț și rănirea altor oameni de 'câinii
maidanezi' (...)". Macovei a considerat unul dintre puținele gesturi de
corectitudine politică din acele zile ca o recunoaștere a culpei și l-a
transformat într-o armă împotriva lui Oprescu."Oprescu a spus după două
zile de la uciderea lui Ionuț: 'Iertați-ne pe toți'. Asta înseamnă
recunoașterea vinovăției, dar și lașitatea lui Oprescu, care încearcă să
împartă vina. Poate îl va ierta Dumnezeu, nu știu, dar noi nu îl putem
ierta pe primarul Oprescu, care trebuia să își dea demisia din funcția
de primar general al Capitalei din ziua uciderii lui Ionuț. Pentru că nu
și-a dat-o atunci, trebuie să și-o dea astăzi", a conchis Macovei
Oprescu, crucificat de presa apropiată PDL
Cele mai vehemente în a-l pune la zid pe
Oprescu, fără a căuta întreg lanțul vinovaților, au fost publicațiile
și posturile TV apropiate PDL, adică Evenimentul Zilei, România Liberă
și B1TV. Acestea nu au ținut cont de faptul că maidanezii fuseseră
adoptați în 2008 și că au fost reîntorși în stradă printr-o înțelegere
făcută cu ONG-urile. De asemenea, nicio publicație nu a vorbit despre
paza juridică a câinelui, care revenea asociației Caleidoscop, cea care,
sub patronajul unei anume Carmen Secăreanu, și-a asumat
responsabilitatea pentru animal.
Manipularea mitingurilor. De la "Fără câini!", la "Jos Oprescu!"
La câteva zile de la moartea lui Ionuț
Anghel, fosta cântăreață Nadine, căsătorită cu omul de afaceri Dragoș
Apostolescu, organiza un miting de protest împotriva existenței pe
stradă a câinilor maidanezi. Cel puțin, așa a pornit mitingul, pentru că
el s-a transformat într-o execuție a lui Oprescu. Acestuia i-a fost
cerută demisia în mod imperativ, mulțimea fiind inflamată și de
mass-media, care, în mod convenabil, uita să amintească două elemente
importante - câinii aveau stăpân și erau pe o proprietate privată.
Afacerile familiei lui Ionuț cu Videanu
Fratele tatălui lui Ionuț, dar și tatăl
lui Ionuț, au fost, pe rând, acționari în mai multe companii care au
făcut afaceri grase cu Primăria Capitalei, pe vremea când aceasta era
condusă de Adriean Videanu. Ba mai mult, firma căreia îi aparținea
terenul pe care se presupune că s-a petrecut tragedia, Laguna Tei, a
avut un proces cu asociatul din alte firme al tatălui și unchiului lui
Ionuț.
ZIUAnews vă prezintă afacerile făcute de
tatăl lui Ionuț și de unchiul copilului, cu Primăria Generală a
Capitalei, pe vremea când la putere era PDL.
Tatăl lui Ionuț a fost, pe rând, asociat cu fratele său, Anghel Daniel, în mai multe societăți comerciale, Convan SRL, Deal Global SRL și Romet Packing SA, fiind partener de afaceri fie cu fratele său, fie cu un anume Milică Radu.
Tatăl lui Ionuț a fost, pe rând, asociat cu fratele său, Anghel Daniel, în mai multe societăți comerciale, Convan SRL, Deal Global SRL și Romet Packing SA, fiind partener de afaceri fie cu fratele său, fie cu un anume Milică Radu.
Firma Convan SRL, înființată în
decembrie 2000, de Milică Rafaleț Corneliu și Milică Rafaleț Radu, cu
obiect de activitate comerț cu ridicata cu material de construcții și
obiecte sanitare, în care a devenit asociat, din 2007, și fratele
tatălui lui Ionuț, Daniel Anghel, cu 90% și chiar tatăl lui Ionuț un an
mai târziu, cu 5%, a avut contracte cu Primăria Capitalei, în 2006 și
2007, în valoare de sute de mii de lei. Astfel, unul dintre contractele
semnate de Convan, care aparținea la momentul 2007 unchiului lui Ionuț, a
fost în 25 octombrie 2007, pentru furnizarea unor fișete metalice,
contract evaluat la peste 25.000 de lei. Al doilea contract semnat între
Primăria lui Videanu și Convan a fost încheiat în aceeași zi, 25
octombrie 2007, și obiectul său era furnizare produse mochetă, în
valoare de peste 93.000 lei. Cea de-a treia convenție încheiată între
firma familiei lui Ionuț și Primăria Capitalei a fost semnată doar 4
zile mai târziu, în 29 octombrie 2007, pentru furnizare de produse în
vederea achiziționării de materiale tâmplărie pentru executarea
lucrărilor de întreținere la tâmplăria din imobilele care aparțin PMB.
Valoarea contractului a fost de 174.840,75 lei, inclusiv TVA. Două
săptămâni mai târziu, în 15 noiembrie, firma Convan a încheiat un alt
contract, tot cu Primăria Generală, pentru lucrări de întreținere la
instalații electrice, în valoare de peste 12.000 de RON.
Oprescu a stopat afacerile cu firmele familiei Anghel
Afacerile familiei Anghel cu Primăria
Generală s-au încheiat odată cu venirea primarului Sorin Oprescu în
funcția de edil șef al Bucureștiului. Imediat după instalarea sa în
funcție, Oprescu a făcut un audit pentru toate cheltuielile făcute de
predecesorii săi și a denunțat public contractele cu firma Convan, ca
aducătoare de prejudicii pentru instituția pe care o conducea. În acest
context, Oprescu a anunțat că, în cursul anului 2006, Primăria a acordat
firmei Convan un contract în valoare de 1,2 miliarde lei vechi, pentru
reabilitarea sistemului de încălzire, numai că firma nu era autorizată
de Inspecția de Stat pentru Controlul Cazanelor, Recipientelor sub
Presiune și Instalațiilor de Ridicat (ISCIR). Ca atare, municipalitatea a
fost nevoită să încheie un alt contract, cu o altă firmă, care să
repare ce făcuse Convan.
Proprietarul terenului din Tei, în conflict cu asociatul tatălui lui Ionuț
Tatăl lui Ionuț nu a spus public că îl
cunoștea pe cel căruia îi aparține terenul din apropierea parcului Tei,
acolo unde s-ar fi întâmplat tragedia cu Ionuț. Potrivit documentelor
ZIUAnews, asociatul unchiului lui Ionuț și al tatălui acestuia din alte
companii, Milică Rafaleț Corneliu, deținea compania Consproiect Group
SRL. Aceasta a fost acționată în judecată, pentru o somație de plată, de
firma Transporturi Tei Auto SRL, deținută de Constantin Ciorăscu,
același om care avea și administra compania Laguna Tei, proprietară a
terenului din apropierea Parcului Tei, unde Ionuț ar fi murit. La rândul
său, și Transporturi Auto Tei a acționat în judecată, din 2011,
Primăria Capitalei, condusă de Oprescu.
Tatăl lui Ionuț a vorbit despre
proprietarul terenului la emisiuni televizate, dar nu a spus că îl
cunoștea sau că au avut, fie și indirect, relații comerciale. Ba mai
mult, nu l-a acuzat de nimic, susținând chiar că, din punct de vedere
legal, acesta nu avea obligația să își împrejmuiască terenul și că, dacă
nu ar fi existat maidanezi, nimic nu s-ar fi întâmplat. Autoritățile
sunt de vină, a susținut și Valentin Anghel, deși știa că terenul e
proprietatea privată a firmei Laguna Tei!
Abonați-vă la:
Comentarii (Atom)