Thank you Erin, that is nice to know.
Well Renn that was well put and no one could misunderstand your message. I’m proud to agree with both of you. It is the horses that matter and not a $2.00 piece of blue rayon or a trophy. We can get those on ebay and some really great ones were available at the George Morris Auction.
It scares me to think of what would happen to all my horses if their lives depended on the like of Paul Valiere.
Originally posted by anthem35:
Yes, Harry, you’re right…it was a calculated act…of stupidity.
Please, though, allow me this…
The written word is often left to misinterpretation as well as distort. The media has long suffered a reputation of sensationalism as well as slander.
Can you say with sincerity that you personally have given Paul a chance to apologize to you???
Does a forum exist that can allow this man an opportunity to apologize sufficiently?
Once again you are right on the money. 
As an aside… Aunt Esther, it’s anoying that you refer to yourself in the third person, how about trying the first person. Also, I am so the national/international purse champion 
Snowbird and others, I don’t know if any of you are keeping up with what’s going on in the Winter Olympics, but I found this item very relevant to the no reinstatement thread. It deals with ther IOC and how they are currently viewing a banned coach:
This is an paragragh from todays news story
“At a news conference, IOC medical commission chief Arne Ljungqvist held up a postcard showing Mayer in an Austrian Olympic biathlon team photo. He said that while Mayer’s presence in Italy didn’t break the IOC ban, it violated the “spirit” of the decision to keep him out of the games.”
The fact that the IOC has viewed this coach’s presence at the 2006 Winter Olymics to be breaking the Spirit of the IOC’s decision for a 2002 doping violation banning him from future Olymics, is very timly I think.
Snowbird, I am in love with your indomitable spirit. You truly are from a lost time.
Thanks Hopeful Hunter-I’m sure you’ll do a great job.
Oh, I know Andrew…The dog show politics, etc. run rampant, and they make the horse world appear quite tame …but it’s more the sponsors’ treatment of spectators that seems a good example to follow…and Harry, I don’t see the waiters proffering bubbly to the cheap seats @ today’s shows…Unless you mean that motley crew lined up at your motorhome
This topic has brought up a lot of moral questions for me, because in general I am a very forgiving person (to a fault) and try to give people the benefit of the doubt. I do this because I would wish the same chance to be given to me by others.
The basic facts make the situation seem so black and white. I, like others, mentioned it to a friend and she was outraged that the convicts didn’t get life bans, their horses taken away, etc. This is basically how I feel, to be honest, so I had a hard time understanding the other side.
Then I imagined what it would be like if I found out that one of my riding ‘heroes’ had done the crime. Instant revulsion; same reaction as before. So I made it more personal and wondered what I’d do if someone like my BO was convicted of a similar crime. Note that I basically ADORE my BO and I kind of see her like a superhero/deity/mentor/lotsastuff person. (Note for future reference: “I adore my BO” if taken out of context could sound… interesting) First reaction was like “But she’d NEVER do that!” I had to kinda push the limits of my imagination to pretend that she had, and see what I would then do. If I considered how she acts around horses now, the care provided to hers, all the old pasture pals on the property who are living their retirement, etc, it’s very hard to hold to the “no forgive/forget” conviction on this issue. So where does that leave me?
The answer is still the same. There are some things that truly go beyond redemption, at least from a fellow mortal. If I were to discover today that my BO had been involved with this scandal, that would be the end, and I would not look back.
At various points in our lives we are given the opportunity to show our true character. These times are often stressful, tumultuous, push-you-to-the-edge-and-see-how-you-handle-the-pressure. These are the times that integrity is made or destroyed. I cannot -and will not- under any circumstances support a person who would murder an innocent, silent and completely at-your-mercy victim when the chips are down. That horses are his livelihood and he literally depends on them to survive makes this a doubly heinous crime. That he considered his pocketbook or his reputation or who-knows-what more important than the life of an animal that served him and that he had knowingly agreed to take care and responsibility of makes this a triply heinous crime.
You see, when the chips go down again as is the pattern in life, the question becomes not “would he do it again” but “how much farther would he go?” I don’t want to know if the life of someone’s child who’s taking lessons with him is more or less valuable than the ego at the moment or the money in the bank; I don’t want to know exactly how much money it would take before he’d accept a bribe to end someone’s career or take their horse out of commission or even give them advice that would put them out of the ribbons. Don’t you see, it’s not a question of “would he” do something, it’s a question of how much would it cost. He’s already crossed the line. Now, I’m sure that he feels bad on some level for his actions; whether it’s true heartfelt remorse or just “crap I wish I wasn’t caught” sentiments I cannot say. But, I’m sure that for a measly $50k or what ever it was he wouldn’t kill another horse. What, though, if it was $5 million, or $500 million? He wouldn’t need to work for the rest of his life with the latter sum. Why, it might almost be worth the risk if the prize were great enough - certainly that sum would tempt many upright people. But the exacts aren’t important, because there is a price for everything. He’s already proven this; he’s already been bought. It’s not a question of “if,” it’s a question of “how much.” I don’t want to know what the pricetag on me or mine is.
And, FWIW, let me address specifically the “should be be reinstated” question, by posting an excerpt from the Sportsman’s Charter below the USEF mission statement:
<UL TYPE=SQUARE> <LI>That sport is something done for the fun of doing it and that it ceases to be sport when it becomes a business only, something done for what there is in it;
<LI>That the whole structure of sport is not only preserved from the absurdity of undue importance, but is justified by a kind of romance which animates it, and by the positive virtues of courage, patience, good temper, and unselfishness which are demanded by the code;
<LI>That the exploitation of sport for profit alone kills the spirit and retains only the husk and semblance of the thing;
<LI>That the qualities of frankness, courage, and sincerity which mark the good sportsman in private life shall mark the discussions of his interests at a competition. [/list]
And, from the Mission Statement:
<UL TYPE=SQUARE> <LI>As the National Governing Body (NGB) of Equestrian Sport in the United States we will inspire, encourage interest in, and regulate equestrian competition by ensuring the safety and well-being of horses, regardless of value or competitive level…
<LI>Work together with the FEI in its mission to protect competition horses from any form of abuse…
<LI>Protect and support the welfare of horses by inspecting, monitoring and testing to deter use of forbidden substances and other cruel, unsafe and/or unsportsmanlike practices and by adopting and enforcing rules to prohibit such practices. [/list]
PV has violated these basic, founding principles in the worst way possible - by betraying the very animal which makes our sport possible.
Finally, the FEI Code of Conduct, which addresses the issue of protecting horses that the USEF wishes to “work with.”
<UL TYPE=SQUARE> <LI>…at all times the welfare of the horse must be paramount and must never be subordinated to competitive or commercial influences.
<LI> At all stages during the preparation and training of competition horses, welfare must take precedence over all other demands. This includes good horse management, training methods, farriery and tack, and transportation.
<LI>… Every effort must be made to ensure that horses receive proper attention after they have competed and that they are treated humanely when their competition careers are over. This covers proper veterinary care, competition injuries, euthanasia and retirement. [/list]
Murder by electrocution for failing performance to collect insurance money isn’t on that list.
But Anthem, didn’t you say we should encourage him? You know, it is extremely easy for those with money and non structured jobs to donate time and cash. I think that the child who gives up a portion of their allowance, or the ones in this area that gave up a week of showing and sent a truckload of hay, that is an act of charity. They weren’t encouraged, these are kids who compete against each other for points, who decided on their own to make an effort. I would have a difficult time encouraging someone to be charitable, when I see children showing charitable instincts
on their own.
First off, welcome to the forum, Sara, but please don’t “shout”.
The No Reinstatement campaign is a grassroots campaign, and is not, and has never claimed to be, sanctioned or approved by USEF. We are all cognizant of the fact that it would be completely inappropriate for USEF to be involved on either side of the debate until such time as any hearing may take place before the Hearings Committee, and I think everyone concerned, no matter which side of the fence they may be on, is in agreement on that.
I haven’t seen all the bracelets - several individuals have had them made up at their own expense - but neither the USEF acronym nor logo appear on the bracelets currently for sale via the web site. The acronym “USEF” does appear on some of the apparel, but only in the context of the slogan, not in any context which could be construed as an attempt on the part of the no reinstatement campaign to imply affiliation with USEF.
Apparel sales are non-profit. The items are sold at the break-even price point and no one at all is making any profit, other than the manufacturer, Cafe Press. 
As to the bracelets - which are a separate entity - there is a potential profit there, but we certainly are not in the black as of yet! If enough bracelets are sold to put the campaign into profit, then that money will be put into a general non-profit fund administered by Snowbird. We will either use that money to campaign again when the next round of folks becomes eligible for reinstatement in three years, or, if we get enough, we’ll come back to the ideas that have been mentioned farther back in the thread, such as taking out trade advertisements, sponsoring a memorial trophy in memory of the dead horses, or sponsoring a scholarship for a young rider.
There were indeed two separate suspension dates. We are going by the date stated in the latter of the reports of the minutes of the Hearing Committee.
Lastly, while many owners, competitors and trainers do in fact own properties that are now directly adjacent to the show grounds in question owing to expansion, not all of them choose to coach students from “across the line” on show days via walkie-talkie or other similar devices while under USEF suspension. That’s an ethical decision that each suspended individual must make for him or herself.
Hope that clarifies.
Well said Fairview! It is not PR that matters it is principles.
Originally posted by Fairview Horse Center:
<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><div class=“ip-ubbcode-quote-title”>quote:</div><div class=“ip-ubbcode-quote-content”>Originally posted by anthem35:
There is a lot of good that comes out of the bad, and I believe we are all deserving of a second chance.
Absolutely, and he should be allowed to have a job, a home, develop friends, and prove what a good person he has become. Getting back the same status, and control over animals should NOT be part of his future. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Control over animals that people have voluntarily taken to him.
It is your choice NOT to, and I can understand that.
But that decision should be left up to each individual based on their own ideas and priorities.
He becomes eligible to apply for reinstatement in April 2006. Again (I mentioned this on t’other thread but it’s worth repeating here) WE DO NOT KNOW whether he has yet applied. But it’s safe to assume he will.
Some other updates:
We’ve got a domain name! Nothing on it yet, just a parking meter, but we will have a web site very shortly thanks to a kind volunteer. You know who you are. Bless you.
We also have a couple of staggeringly gorgeous LOGOS in the works, thanks to that same volunteer.
I never did hear back from petitiononline so I’m going to go fix some linkies in the temporary microsite, and will BBL. You call can use the petition on that site to take to shows and whatnot.
I can only speak about my end of the bracelets–I order them with my own money-if people want them, they pay what they cost me to make them plus postage to mail them. No profit. I have invoices to back it up if need be.
Basket weaving would be less repitious.
PRCA is the Professional Rodeo Cowboy’s Association. Not affiliated with USEF in any way, but with a bigger budget and a self vested interest in turning the plight of abused animals to another venue.
That’s a superior analogy.
O.K., back to one my earlier questions. If one or more USEF members suspect PV is breaking the Rules, and a complaint has been lodged, is it now in the hands of USEF officials? Are they investigating these allegations? If so, how does one stay informed of the progress of the investigation?
Originally posted by harryjohnson:
Big Dawg, probably due to the fact that this thread is the “NO REINSTATEMENT” thread, you might find it to be one sided. What an epiphany! With that said DUDE, I think that my posts are concise enough that they do not need any clarification. If someone feels they need a further explanation, they can freely ask me, they are not in need of your footnotes.
So then, Dude, what you are saying is—only opinions in agreement with the apparent one-sided nature of this thread are to be posted/or, is what you are saying–no one who disagrees with you is to post anything…Woof, Woof [remember I bite]
Originally posted by anthem35:
And yes, I really DO believe he is ONE of the best we have.
What success has Paul had in the last ten or so years that he can claim for his reputation that can support your opinion?
