British Expatriate Network

Some of you may not be interested in this story all as it only involves pets . ill tell it anyway .
There are charities set in every community in the US (including yours ) that care for and rescue unwanted and abused animals many who cant defend for themselves .
the folks who run these establishments take time to administer love & affection to these creatures and strive to undo any mistreatment they have suffered at the hands of us humans .
We ( i can say this as a volunteer in one such organisation ) then do our utmost to find a loving and caring home for these unwanted pets and by a contract we remain in touch to insure that the animals are care for and shown affection so they can live the rest of there days in a happy environment . most applicants will be granted custody of the animal for a small fee (to cover the running of the establishment ) and any medical bill the agengy incured

So this person *degenarate *thinks the rules dont apply to her and she can adopt a animal to GIVE it anyway later with out any application (change of custody ) or any sence of resposibility to the agency who cared for and nutured this dog so it was able to regain its place in society .

All i want is a loving home for this pet he deserves that t he has harmed nobody ...
( anybody seeing his pic will fall in love with him ) the degenarates of this world must come to realize there are rules that we ALL have to follow and your *FAME does not exempt you from that responsiblity .


http//www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ent/celebrities/5217446.html

I don't see that its any of their business what happens to the dog once its adopted out. I'm sure they give an adequate background check to an adoptee, and let it go to a decent owner. Once that owner assumes custody of the pet, its his or her responsibility what happens to it.

I'm pretty sure this doesn't want to be in the food forum -I see no recipes offeed for the dog- so I'm moving it. ;)

(hmm, t'was a tough choice -here or entertainment. I think here.)

In all fairness, John, Ellen Degeneres has apologised for her mistake, and has never denied that she was the one at fault for this particular issue. However, she also pointed out that Iggy has a chip that was supposed to have had her name put on. If this had been done, this mess wouldn't have happened either because she would have gotten the dog back.

Ellen has given millions of dollars to the help of animals. She has never said once that this gives her the right to do as she wants, but it also shows that she would not put an animal in a harmful situation.

While rules are in place, a bit of common sense can see that no harm was meant by her actions. a solution could have been found without the dog or the children having to suffer from one person's mistake. And that is the point that Ellen has been trying to make since this all happened.

I have'nt been following this but it has been thrust at me by the media. I don't understand not letting pet dogs go to homes with children. My dogs were my best mates, anything stupid I wanted to do, they said "Let's do it", and they took the same risks that I did. And had the same great fun.

I understand there is an interesting contrast in requirements for cats from the pound. In the UK, you promise to let them out; here you promise not to let them out.

There's also the minor but relevant point that Portia, Ellen's girlfriend adopted the dog, signed the papers, gave the animal away, but who cares, if you have someone really famous to deride, go for it.
Ah America, home of the bigot. lol

Forced on me too, I heard that this isn't the first one she's offloaded....

Oh and I think she deserves tarring and feathering for using her show and her status to try and bully the agency into condoning her rule-breaking.

If she didn't use her advantage, she'd be Saint Ellen Degeneres.

BS. It's not an "advantage", it's a position of power completely unrelated to the matter in hand.