XPost: rec.al-quaeda 
 From: mmontcha@OregonVOS.net 
  
 Arthur L. Rubin wrote: 
 |Matthew Montchalin wrote: 
 |> 
 |> On Fri, 5 Sep 2003, Orchid wrote: 
 |> |RATIONALE: rec.pets.cats.breeds 
 |> | 
 |> |There is no place, currently, for the discusson of purebred cats and 
 |> |their breeders.  This group would be a place to discuss the pros and 
 |> |cons of various breeds, how to find a responsible, ethical breeder, 
 |> |announcements of upcoming shows, reports from said shows, and to find 
 |> |advice from other owners and breeders.  The purebred cat fancy has 
 |> |grown a great deal in the last five years, with more and more people 
 |> |realising that breeds of cats differ significantly in temperament, 
 |> |activity level, grooming requirements, etc. 
 |> | 
 |> |CHARTER: rec.pets.cats.breeds 
 |> | 
 |> |The newsgroup rec.pets.cats.breeds will be open to discussions on all 
 |> |topics related to purebred cats and their husbandry. 
 |> 
 |> If you struck out the word 'purebred,' this proposal would fly very well. 
 |> 
 |> As it is, it seems to alienate owners of hybrids (and very likely the 
 |> kittens of cats that have been rescued [bought] from laboratories). 
 | 
 |You mean "stolen" (or "liberated"), do you not. 
  
 I have no doubt that there are criminals out there who steal cats from 
 laboratories.  No doubt *you* have some special insight into their frame 
 of mind? 
  
 |I was leaning toward abstain, but your posts give me a reason to 
 |vote YES. 
  
 Maybe I'll vote YES too, then.  It's not like anybody has really 
 defined 'purebred' to my satisfaction, yet. 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)