Orrin's Racism Thesis Takes Another Hit

It's been a while since the last posting. As this blog is primarily dedicated to refuting the delusions that frequently flow from Off-leash Hours policy rejectionist Orrin and his so-called "Committee for Responsible Dog Ownership" aka CREDO, which is neither a committee nor has dog owners (check that, out of the three known CREDO members, one does claim to have a dog), there just hasn't been much of worth from Orrin's disjointed and stubbornly wrongheaded missives in 4Q 2008 to discuss. Orrin just kept posting the same boring delusions that don't break any new ground, nor coherently contribute to his general rejection of the 20+ year successful Off-leash Hours policy and his hatred of the thousands of dog owners in NYC who responsibly take advantage of the Designated Off-leash Areas (DOLAs), now in 89 NYC parks.

But it's a new year, and Orrin's whackadoodle racist anti-dog/anti-dog owner theory is being tested yet again. This time by his own blog entry.

Frequent readers may remember that following the fringe off-leash rejectionists' total defeat in 2006-2007, our Dear Orrin struggled to find a peg to hang his anti-Offleash Policy hat upon.

The Off-leash Hours policy rejectionists were shut down every which way but loose (no pun intended)--legally in NYS Supreme Court, from a public health perspective at the NYC Health Department, in the court of public opinion as overwhelming support for the 20+ successful Off-leash Hours policy appeared in tens of thousands of petition signatures and on public opinion polls in the major NYC weeklies, and of course the final insult to their self-inflicted injury, when the NYC DOPR formally codified the formerly "unofficial" policy.

So poor Dear Orrin felt a bit left out. It appeared that only him, a few hopelessly grizzled Archie Bunker types in Middle Village, Queens, and one or two of his radical birder Internet friends felt the way he did against his fellow citizens. (Interesting side note: this author attended a recent dinner at which several birders were happy to discuss some of the radical anti-dog fringe birders such as Dear Orrin and his buddy the so-called Prospect Park "Advocate" and how the rational mainstream birder community rejected their futile calls to go against the Off-leash Hours and politely asked said radical anti-dog birders to leave their group).

Orrin thought to himself--since the challenged Off-leash Hours policy got a full and fair hearing in court, court of public opinion, in front of public health professionals, and has been shown over 20 years to be a very popular and beneficial policy, so much so that the Parks Department decided to codify it in its regulations--there must be some sneaky, cynical, depraved, disingenuous, cowardly, yet effective way to somehow still kill it.

That's when Dear Orrin came up with his Cynical Bogus Racist Ploy. In a nutshell, a made up attempt to "scare" city government officials by playing a false race card, in the belief that certain City agencies (such as the DOPR) are so sensitive to charges of racism and racial discrimination, that he could somehow get their attention, manipulate them, and finally get his way. In Orrin's World, his way would be the total abolition of the Off-leash Hours policy. The baby with the bathwater approach that Dear Orrin and his micro-ilk so strongly advocate, and have failed so badly to achieve.

So our Dear Orrin has been carefully counting the number of "Black," "White," "Mexican" people he sees with and without dogs in various parks and our very white Dear Orrin has arrived at his brilliant hypothesis from his life experience and hours of careful observation through his anti-Off-leash colored glasses: Black people are afraid of dogs, so therefore the Off-leash Hours policy is keeping Black people out of the parks, so therefore the Off-leash Hours policy discriminates against Black people.

So Orrin's been blogging repeatedly about his racial observations and theories. And he's found company in the single dog owner in the 3 person "Committee for Responsible Dog Ownership" - Kim E., Pit Bull Owner, of late calling herself "Datnioides", and who has jumped on Orrin's Cynical Bogus Racist Ploy bandwagon.

However, on his New Years Day 2009 blog entry, it completely escapes our Dear Orrin that the recent DOPR approval to make Coffey Park (or as Orrin repeatedly/incorrectly types "Coffee" Park) the 89th park in NYC designated to have Off-leash Hours, completely shatters his Cynical Bogus Racist Ploy.

Red Hook is one of the most ethnically, racially, economically diverse communities in NYC. There's a sizable public housing population, a significant Latino community, and a large African American constituency represented.

The process to declare Coffey Park a DOLA took the better part of a year, as first the community received provisional permission to try out a DOLA to see if:
(a) a responsible group of dog owners would use the facility (it did),
(b) contribute to the park (they do),
(c) comply with the rules (they do),
(d) and to see how the rest of the community perceived the DOLA (as a benefit to the park and the community).

So guess what happened? A large responsible group of people takes their dogs to Coffey Park on a daily basis, forming strong friendships and community bonds across class, racial, ethnic lines (which so often happens when people of all stripes gather in all weather, day and night to care for their dogs) with each other, other park goers, and others in the community.

In fact, the president of the Red Hook Tennent's Association, which is a representative group for the very racially diverse public housing in Red Hook, who's also a member of the local CB, joined to unanimously approve the DOLA in Coffey Park after the months long experiment to see how the DOLA benefited the entire community progressed. Judging by the community support, the support of the CB, and the local associations, it's been successful and was overwhelmingly approved by one of the largest non-white and African American communities in the City.

Our Dear Orrin, if he ever set foot in Coffee (sic) Park, might see what he chooses not to see in Prospect or Central Park; that the 20+ year successful and now official Off-leash Hours policy brings diverse groups people together in this City around something most people can agree to--that the 1.4 million dogs in the NYC should be properly socialized, exercised, and that taking one's dog to the park is a beneficial recreational activity for all citizens, whether you own a dog or not.

But we know our Dear Orrin. He'll conveniently ignore this inconvenient truth and continue to keep his Off-leash rejectionist lenses firmly strapped to his eyes.

Also interesting in Orrin's post is that he lets the real truth slip again out why he's really so vehemently opposed to the Off-leash Hours policy. You see, in Orrin's World, apparently the parkland should just be for HIS recreational activity, and not other peoples. We've known about the rejectionists' selfish reasons for trying to kill Off-leash Hours in 2006, but it's nice to see them occasionally admit it to themselves and others in print.

A happy and healthy 2009 to everyone, even Orrin and his ilk. I'm sure we'll be hearing more racial theories and other interesting perspectives in the coming year from the rejectionists. For them, it's like being the Grinch all year long.

More Orrin Deliberate Misrepresentations

We like to give Dear Orrin the benefit of the doubt. His out of context quotes and bizarre assertions using snippets of secondary and tertiary sources create some truly wacky assertions and conclusions.

So, let's ignore Orrin's hardcore racism, let's ignore his maniacal obsession with responsible dog owner groups, let's ignore his ongoing close association with the flotsam and jetsam of the failed Off-leash Hours Rejectionist micro-ilk.

Let's just say that Orrin's suffers from poor reading comprehension, and only sees the world through his anti-dog and anti-dog owner lenses and his very wishful thinking that off-leash recreation will simply go away after the micro-ilk's failed jihad two years ago actually codified and strengthened the successful 20+ year policy (thanks Orrin! and please give your buddies in Queens again our thanks for spending all that money on their failed lawsuit).

Here's some choice examples from one of his latest CREDO posts at: http://credo-ny2.blogspot.com/2008/09/credo-doubles-its-membership.html

Orrin exhibits his sadness that a squirrel which entered a house in Long Island was euthanized after the rodent bit the family dog. What Dear Orrin doesn't say, and which is clearly mentioned in the article in the same sentence, was that the squirrel bit the family dog AND the family teen aged daughter. Dear Orrin couldn't have left out the bitten teenaged daughter on purpose! It must have been an oversight for Dear Orrin. Or maybe not.....

Now either Dear Orrin wants his readership to be intentionally misinformed about the entire truth of the squirrel incident, thereby trying to throw more mud against his anti-offleash agenda wall, or Dear Orrin simply is a poor reader and missed those few word in the article that he quoted that a girl was bit by a squirrel. We hope that Orrin wouldn't have volunteered to transport and return a squirrel that bit a human into Prospect Park. So he must have simply misread this secondary source (as he's wont to do). Or perhaps Orrin secretly fantasizes about squirrels attacking off-leash advocates in the Long Meadow.

Also in the same post, Dear Orrin misreads an article in a Boston newspaper about a local politician who recognizes that Boston has less than one handful of few dog runs and Designated Offleash Areas, which has led the explosion of dogs and their owners in Beantown to seek off-leash opportunities that are not legal.

Unfortunately, the people of Boston, one of the largest cities in the U.S. have a severe paucity of off-leash recreational venues. The politician quoted in the article specifically mentions this, and which the politician conjectures may be leading to dog owners allowing their dogs off-leash in non-designated areas. The politician wants to encourage responsible dog ownership, so he is proposing a multi-prong solution for all the people of Boston:

Linehan has called for a public hearing to open dialogue between the groups
and to discuss whether the city needs to toughen up penalties for violating
leash and pooper-scooper regulations, step up enforcement, and look at the
possibility of creating more dog-friendly areas so the pets and their owners have somewhere to go.

That Orrin has chosen to discuss this story is interesting, and points the wrongheadedness
in his years old "baby with the bathwater" approach to dogs and
off-leash recreation.

Orrin and his micro-ilk fought tooth and nail (no pun intended) against
Off-leash recreation two years ago, and failed in their
jihad.

What this article shows is that the Boston politician quoted realized there's
a need for Designated Off-leash Areas in Boston. That to foster a culture of
responsible dog ownership, legal off-leash recreation must be part of the
equation, in addition to enforcement. This is lost on Orrin and his
micro-ilk, who simply want the policy banned and hope that dogs and their owners
somehow go away.

Perhaps Dear Orrin could re-read his secondary sources to learn that less off-leash opportunites in an urban setting for dogs and their owners increases exactly what Orrin doesn't like to see, nor responsible dog owners like to see--which is off-leash dogs where they are not permitted.

Perhaps one day Dear Orrin will see the light and realize that his "baby with the bathwater" desires are counterproductive and instead he should work with responsible dog owners and their usergroups to encourage respectful park stewardship, enforcement of the rules, and sharing of the parks with all usergroups--including dog owners. Perhaps under an Obama administration Dear Orrin will come around.

CREDO Doubles Its Membership!

1 x 2 = 2

With her latest nonsensical screed, Kim E., pit bull owner (of late calling herself Datnioides), joins Dear Orrin in his vile racist assertion that off-leash hours patrons are all a bunch of, to quote Kim E,

ill-mannered rich white people who, like infants, find it difficult to
relinquish their ambulatory teddy bears.

See the comments on this post: http://credo-ny.blogspot.com/2008/09/off-leash-hours-and-dirty-bookstores.html

Congratulations to "The Committee on Responsible Dog Ownership" (CREDO), not only have you doubled your membership base, but you now actually have a real live dog owner! A first for "The Committee." And your newest member, with her latest choice comment above, seems to sign on to your Bogus Cynical Racist Ploy. Well done. The force of your arguments is moving mountains.

Perhaps over the next few months, you might be able to get your numbers up to the old "Army of Eight". Old timers may remember the Army of Eight as the unholy alliance of self-proclaimed "Prospect Park Advocates" and the flotsam and jetsam of the off-leash hours rejectionist micro-movement which included Kim E, and the good people over at the second largest civic association in Middle Village who, with their failed NYS supreme court law suit, tried to destroy the Off-leash Hours policy, but only ended up strengthening it to their everlasting chagrin.

Orrin's Ironic Lack of Irony

Could Orrin actually be reading TimeOut NY online, or more likely his Goggle Alert set to all things off-leash pointed him to an article about a young film maker.

Being Orrin, and predisposed to seeing the world through his unique and bizarre ideological prism, our hero either seems to miss the interviewee's sarcastic comments or, likely, as is he wont, and those of his micro-ilk such as Kim E. pit bull owner, black and blue RJ, and the disgraced civic in Queens, he twists published comments to intentionally misinform.

At least this time, Orrin misinterprets/distorts a primary source. He's usually more for misinterpreting/distorting secondary or tertiary sources.

CREDO/Orrin’s Latest Paranoid Delusions Exposed

The following post was contributed by a Off-leash Hours supporter and Credo2 reader:

Credo/Orrin once again exposes himself with his latest post: http://credo-ny.blogspot.com/2008/09/more-tales-of-loose-pit-bulls.html

In his latest diatribe, Dear Orrin conflates an irresponsible dog owner (Marcia) in Prospect Park with a pit bull that broke loose from a chain on Long Island and subsequently was shot after it bit two people. Then he goes further and uses a quote from a newspaper in Dadeville, Alabama (population 3,212) where a loose dog went into a neighbor’s yard and killed a teacup dog.

There is no doubt that Marcia in Prospect is an irresponsible person (not just a dog owner). FIDO Brooklyn has complained about her for years. Parks employees and officials have complained. Unless the police see her violating the rules (walking her dogs off leash in prohibited areas, encouraging her dogs to attack small wildlife in the park, etc.) or threatening people, they are somewhat powerless. No one likes what she does and she is not representative of responsible dog ownership or the off-leash community. She is not a nice person and we hope she is appropriately punished and finally stopped.

The dog attack in Farmingdale, Long Island was unfortunate. Clearly the unknown owners of the dog kept it chained; a cruel practice that some city officials are trying to outlaw. The dog could not have been properly trained or socialized. We regret that people were attacked and are sorry that the dog had to be shot because of its irresponsible ownership.

The Alabama incident has nothing to do with off-leash. No responsible dog owner allows their dog to wander residential neighborhoods off-leash.

However, we have to ask: what does this have to do with off-leash rights in City parks?

But once again dear Orrin finds it necessary to connect the dots. Unlike a children’s drawing, these dots do not connect to form a cogent picture. Illogical connections only produce unintelligible conclusions. He is so obsessed that he searches the Internet for any stories about dog bites, off-leash dogs, etc and then extrapolates these incidents to attack the limited time and place off-leash rights for NYC dog owners in 88 city parks.

We think Orrin would not be happy in any community whether Dadeville, Alabama or Brooklyn, NY. He simply has to find fault and cannot consider the possibility that there is not a conspiracy lurking behind every tree. Paranoia is dangerous. In people suffering from delusions, paranoia grows over time and makes life miserable for them and whoever they encounter.

DOG BEACH: leptospirosis, DOGS, AND CHILDREN

Orrin goes on to mention that parents allowed their children to wade at Dog Beach in Prospect Park:

“At about 11:15 this morning, four human babies were observed playing in the
water at the dog beach. If in fact the resident rats leave bacteria in the water
that's dangerous to dogs, isn't it dangerous to children also? And if so, why
isn't there a sign? Or is the DOPR now concerned only about dogs?”

Well, Orrin, how about reading your own CREDO posts? Scroll down and look at your photograph of the Dog Beach sign. It clearly says that humans are not allowed in the water. Do you really think any other signs would have stopped these parents from foolishly allowing their children in the water?

But we do agree with Credo about one thing: Parks should post a warning sign about the current danger of leptospirosis infection due to rat urine and feces in the area of Dog Beach.

What Credo/Orrin don’t say this time, is that a few days ago, he was complaining about the Parks Department effort to control the rat population in the park. He said that rats should be allowed to multiply as they provide food for large, hunting birds (red tail hawks, etc.).

We want our avian population protected. If using certain poisons threatens these birds through transmission from captured rats to birds, we advocate the use of safer methods to control the rat population. Yet, unlike Orrin, we do not see some nefarious conspiracy by Parks to rid the parks of birds so dogs can have the entire park.

Give it a break Orrin. Parks is committed to helping wildlife, not killing it.

CREDO: Censorship, Propogandist Lies & More Racism

This post was submitted to this blog by a supporter of Off-leash Hour Policy in NYC Parks:

Once again, CREDO has resorted to censorship, selective editing, and misrepresentation in order to advance his racist rants in a lame effort to discredit the off-leash community.

In his latest post: http://credo-ny.blogspot.com/2008/09/all-news-that-fits.html, Orrin (the lone face behind Credo) attempts to attack off leash by referencing the recent New York Times blog on dog parks and off-leash in New York City.

The Times question and answer blog was authored by Frances R. Sheridan, the writer and photographer of “Unleashed: The Dog Runs of New York City” Over three days, she answered reader’s questions about Dog Parks and off-leash rights.

Here are just a few of Orrin’s latest distortions:

• First he picks up the question on the Times site by Pashelle whom he claims is his friend Datnioides. If true, readers should know that Pashelle/Datnioides is really “Kim E” a disgruntled dog owner who has failed to train or socialize her dogs so that they can enjoy off-leash.
  
• Second, he posts her Times comment and then censors the response from a Prospect Park user identified on the Times as “Orrin.” He deleted the poster’s screen name and refers to an obvious typographical error as an “illiterate” response in a lame effort to denigrate the writer. We do not know who this “Orrin” is but suspect that it is a Prospect Park user familiar with CREDO/Orrin rants so this man or woman used “Orrin” as a way of tweaking CREDO. Or –and we have no way of knowing – this person really is someone named Orrin. After all, it is not so unique as to be exclusive to one person.
  
• Third, CREDO/Orrin then posts Ms. Sheridan’s response to Pashelle/Datnioides/KimE. Here is the full response:

Pashelle, I do have a great deal of empathy for those who are nervous around or
afraid of dogs. I am sorry you have had unpleasant experiences in your park. The
rules must be followed regarding the unleashed hours and you should alert the
parks police if you are finding them broken. The few who break the rules should
be fined and not be allowed to ruin an entire program for everyone. The great
majority of dog owners are sensitive to other people and do not want their dogs
to make them uncomfortable. This need not be a black-and-white issue where you
love or hate dogs simply because you want the rights of all park users
respected. “Also, reiterating what Orrin posted, the rules show that there are
specific areas and times for unleashed activity. You are by no means being
forced to endure any interaction with off leash dogs. “I am glad to hear your
dog is properly exercised and happy. It is possible, appropriate and necessary
for some dogs to only be walked while leashed. “I have spent a great deal of
time closely observing dogs, and I can tell you that there is a spark that
shines through when a dog owns its own movements and engages in play on its own
terms. It is a kind of transformative magic. For most dogs unleashed play is
healthy for their bodies through exercise, their minds through strategies and
independent thought, their emotions through their pet friendships, their hearts
through strengthening the bond they have with their person, and their spirits
through what a sense of freedom does for all living beings.”

• Credo/Orrin refers to Ms. Sheridan’s well thought-out responses as “platitudes” meaning “trite or prosaic.” Whenever he cannot refute the facts, he digresses to personal attacks. Poor Orrin. “The mind is a terrible thing to lose,” Dan Quayle.
  
• Finally, Credo quotes another New York Times reader who in response to Ms. Sheridan’s statement “the few who break the rules should be fined and not be allowed to ruin an entire program for everyone” with this comment:

“Yes, they should. But how do you identify them and fine them when both the dog
and the owner run away after breaking a pedestrian’s knee or causing a cyclist
to crash, trashing the bike and breaking a collarbone? You can’t, period. For
you to suggest so is unrealistic at best, possibly hypocritical. It’s “love me,
love my dog,”

Once again, Credo failed to post the response to that by another Times reader named Steve: “

bicyclists and automobiles are faster than dog owners and dogs. Yes, there are
violators and some do run away, but the same might be said about bikers and
drivers. The few should not be used to ruin it for the majority who do abide by
the laws. Neither should those few be used to castigate the majority.”

Of course Credo/Orrin cannot acknowledge the truth in Steve’s comment. After all, it is logical and well reasoned.

CREDO RACISM CONTINUES

Credo/Orrin continues his racist rants with this posted statement:

“And, as we keep pointing out, while it is true that the neighborhoods
around Prospect Park are ethnically diverse, the off-leash community is almost
exclusively white.”

After citing five alleged violations of off-leash rules out of hundreds of thousands of off-leash users in three city parks (two of the most visited urban parks in the nation, by the way), once again, CREDO/Orrin resort to racism.

We know Orrin checks the www.FidoBrooklyn.com website since he often refers (and misinterprets) it. Readers, we invite you to check the facts. Last weekend, a NY State Senator yn hosted Diversity Day in Prospect Park with dog owners (later followed by a diversity bike ride event). FIDO has posted several photos of the event.

As any objective reader can easily discern from the photographs, participants were black, white, brown, and yellow. They were old, young. They were handicapped and body able. They were male and female. In short, they were a cross section of New York City in all its glorious diversity.

Off-leashers come from all communities. Socializing their dogs together allows people to get to know one another. Few dog owners (and no responsible dog owners) distinguish by race or ethnicity. It simply is unimportant.

CREDO/Orrin is attempting to use race as a wedge issue to separate people by race for his own purposes. He wants people out of Prospect Park.

Just read his prior post wherein he claims that dogs are responsible for wear and tear on lawns and ballfields utilized by literally millions of Prospect Park users. Somehow –against all facts (just read the comments and his silly responses to the commenter) - he knows that dogs caused the wearing down of the outfields by every baseball diamond. Somehow he knows that dogs caused the damage near a corner where multiple sidewalks converge at odd angles. It must be difficult living as the “all knowing being of all things.”


FOR THOSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO READ THE FULL NEW YORK TIMES Q&A ON DOG PARKS AND OFF-LEASH

For those who missed the Times, here are four direct links to questions and answers. Francis Sheridan is a fabulous photographer and writer. You should check out her book while you are at it.

THE ORIGINAL TIMES QUESTIONS:
http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/02/ask-about-new-yorks-dog-runs/?scp=1&sq=Frances%20R.%20Sheridan&st=cse

ANSWERS ONE:
http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/03/answers-about-new-yorks-dog-runs/

ANSWERS TWO:
http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/04/answers-about-new-yorks-dog-runs-part-2/

ANSWERS THREE:
http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/05/answers-about-new-yorks-dog-runs-part-3/

Orrin: So Often, So Wrong

Careful readers of the so-called "Committee for Responsible Dog Ownership" which is actually not a committee, nor does the founder and single "member"--Orrin--actually have a dog, may have noticed by now that Orrin tends to get a lot of things wrong. And not just partially wrong, but dead wrong.

Part of Orrin's chronic lack of knowledge about what he professes to know all about is due to the fact that he takes wild leaps of assumption and extrapolation from bits and pieces of photos, news items, and websites that he uses as secondary and sometimes even tertiary sources.

It's quite shocking how someone of his education level consistently gets his facts, assumptions, and conclusions flat wrong. And then when you add his hard core racism, you have the makings of a real piece of work.

Today's case in point:

Our Dear Orrin, in a recent screed, believes through his careful observation and genius extrapolation of certain "facts" that "as far as he knows" that the DOPR does not consult Community Boards when making decisions about designated off-leash areas and enclosed dog runs. Oops, Orrin, here's another example of where you're simply totally incorrect.

In fact, Community Boards are frequently consulted. Here's one of may examples. Consulted is the operative word. Because, Dear Orrin, if you knew your civics, and there are clearly huge gaps in your knowledge of civics (perhaps you were absent the day they taught it in law school), you'd know that under the City Charter, Community Boards are consultative bodies on items that involve the DOPR and that the DOPR always makes the final decisions. Your buddies in Queens must be giving you bad information.

Perhaps some of Orrin's wrongheadedness can be attributed to his paranoia. Many examples of Orrin's paranoia abound (see previous blog posts on this site). When things don't make sense to Dear Orrin through his careful evaluation of secondary and tertiary sources, our hero smells--CONSPIRACY!

Orrin has of late turned his maniacal obsession with the good people at FIDO, over to his paranoia about Tupper Thomas. There must be a conspiracy some where there! First our Dear Orrin accuses FIDO of being Tupper's puppet organization (which should be big news to the scores of people who founded FIDO ten years ago and who recently celebrated FIDO's ten year anniversary), and the 400+ paying members, and the hundreds more who participate in FIDO events. Now, our Dear Orrin believes that a personal legal matter that affected him last year was personally and continually thwarted by Ms. Thomas.

You see, when things don't go Orrin's way, he immediately lashes his rage and irrationality out on others. Our Hero's not one to live a life well examined.

Oh, and Orrin's Cynical Bogus Racist Ploy (one of his many paranoid delusions), took another hit as a local State Senator sponsored Diversity Day in conjunction with FIDO. Hundreds of people of all backgrounds attended to celebrate how responsible dog ownership brings all people of Brooklyn together (except for Orrin as one of the few hold outs). Photos of Diversity Day can be found on the FIDO site.