Salem Mo Wikipedia and Phineas

Salem Mo Wikipedia and Phineas

Posted in the Salem Forum

First Prev
of 4
Next Last
Angry With the Mayor

Ridgedale, MO

#1 May 14, 2013
Yep, Wikipedia has picked up the Phineas story. Oh my.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salem,_Missouri
oh my!

United States

#2 May 14, 2013
That's ridiculous!
Rob

United States

#3 May 14, 2013
Well on the plus side, it didn't say anything about our last stupid happening in town. I like small town, USA but sometimes it gets embarassing being from Salem.
XXX

Salem, MO

#4 May 14, 2013
Angry With the Mayor wrote:
Yep, Wikipedia has picked up the Phineas story. Oh my.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salem,_Missouri
Wikipedia didn't pick up anything, you moron. Anyone can go on wikipedia and change information. What has happened is, some idiot that lives in some other town has posted this crap on the wikipedia site to make OUR town look bad. When are you going to understand that by spreading all of these lies put out there by this group of radicals, you are endangering the town and the people who live here?
And they ARE lies. Torture, starvation and abuse? Those allegations have been proven false. That is what seems to really piss off this group. The dog is being cared for properly by the city and you idiots are mad because of it. Would you be happier if the pictures came out of a dog that was in horrible shape, starved and beaten? Would that make you feel more justified?
Angry With the Mayor

Ridgedale, MO

#5 May 14, 2013
XXX wrote:
<quoted text>
Wikipedia didn't pick up anything, you moron. Anyone can go on wikipedia and change information. What has happened is, some idiot that lives in some other town has posted this crap on the wikipedia site to make OUR town look bad. When are you going to understand that by spreading all of these lies put out there by this group of radicals, you are endangering the town and the people who live here?
And they ARE lies. Torture, starvation and abuse? Those allegations have been proven false. That is what seems to really piss off this group. The dog is being cared for properly by the city and you idiots are mad because of it. Would you be happier if the pictures came out of a dog that was in horrible shape, starved and beaten? Would that make you feel more justified?
You don't get it at all You just don't and likely never will but I'll give it a try.

Phineas was (and likely IS) being kept in a small crate in the damp and the dark and was refused veterinary care. That is admitted by the city. The Dept of Ag inspector saw that. Unfortunately, in Missouri this is perfectly ok. Most people don't agree with that line of thought. Thus, some see that as torture all by itself.

If you look closely at the picture of Phineas that the local newspaper took, he showed signs of being in the crate too long and in the same position too long. He also showed signs of having been treated recently for dehydration and had urine stains on his fur likely from being in a soiled crate.

All of that qualifies under Missouri law as Class C Misdemeanor and is punishable by law. The Dept of Ag inspector saw the corrected conditions and saw the dog after vet care had finally been provided. That does not cancel out what occurred before nor does it make up for the judge scheduling a hearing and then cancelling it without notifying the attorney's for Phineas.
XXX

Salem, MO

#6 May 14, 2013
Angry with the Mayor, are you telling me that in 2 days, the dog went from near death in a "torture" situation to pristine condition after 1 visit to the vet? I don't think so. Not unless that vet is some sort of witch doctor. You're an idiot. There is no way that dog was in anything like the condidtions that you describe. I know this is going to upset you but, IT JUST DIDN'T HAPPEN THE WAY YOU HOPED!

Now, I know that in order for you to feel like your time is being well spent, you NEED for someone to mistreat the dog. But you're 'barking' up the wrong tree with this one. No matter how many times you're proved wrong you just keep slinging mud. First you idiots were mad because the dog was being "tortured". Then you were mad because the pictures of the dog looked great.

What kind of a sick person are you? You thrive on seeing animals that are abused and neglected and when you see one that's not it makes you mad! You might want to check yourself into some kind of facility. You've got issues!
Andrew

Salem, MO

#7 May 14, 2013
XXX wrote:
Angry with the Mayor, are you telling me that in 2 days, the dog went from near death in a "torture" situation to pristine condition after 1 visit to the vet? I don't think so. Not unless that vet is some sort of witch doctor. You're an idiot. There is no way that dog was in anything like the condidtions that you describe. I know this is going to upset you but, IT JUST DIDN'T HAPPEN THE WAY YOU HOPED!
Now, I know that in order for you to feel like your
time is being well spent, you NEED for someone to mistreat the dog. But you're 'barking' up the wrong tree with this one. No matter how many times you're proved wrong you just keep slinging mud. First you idiots were mad because the dog was being "tortured". Then you were mad because the pictures of the dog looked great.
What kind of a sick person are you? You thrive on seeing animals that are abused and neglected
and when you see one that's not it makes you mad! You might want to check yourself into some kind of facility. You've got issues!
Canine Munchhausen by proxy.
Angry With the Mayor

Ridgedale, MO

#8 May 14, 2013
XXX wrote:
Angry with the Mayor, are you telling me that in 2 days, the dog went from near death in a "torture" situation to pristine condition after 1 visit to the vet? I don't think so. Not unless that vet is some sort of witch doctor. You're an idiot. There is no way that dog was in anything like the condidtions that you describe. I know this is going to upset you but, IT JUST DIDN'T HAPPEN THE WAY YOU HOPED!
Now, I know that in order for you to feel like your time is being well spent, you NEED for someone to mistreat the dog. But you're 'barking' up the wrong tree with this one. No matter how many times you're proved wrong you just keep slinging mud. First you idiots were mad because the dog was being "tortured". Then you were mad because the pictures of the dog looked great.
What kind of a sick person are you? You thrive on seeing animals that are abused and neglected and when you see one that's not it makes you mad! You might want to check yourself into some kind of facility. You've got issues!
No one said Phineas was in pristine condition. No one. They said "good condition" which is a different thing. Look closely at the photos in the local newspaper. They show the dogs with bumps around his neck. Rather than give IV fluids to an animal when they are dehydrated vets often inject the fluids under the skin which looks exactly like the lumps on Phineas. A vet would only do that if the dog were severely dehydrated. So, he could have been at death's door but we'll never know.

Also if you look closely at his fur in those same pictures, it would appear that he's been lying in his own urine.
And those two things show from the pictures the city says proves he's ok. He's ok NOW but he wasn't until people brought pressure on the city to change things.
Angry with the idiots

Salem, MO

#9 May 14, 2013
Angry With the Mayor wrote:
<quoted text>
No one said Phineas was in pristine condition. No one. They said "good condition" which is a different thing. Look closely at the photos in the local newspaper. They show the dogs with bumps around his neck. Rather than give IV fluids to an animal when they are dehydrated vets often inject the fluids under the skin which looks exactly like the lumps on Phineas. A vet would only do that if the dog were severely dehydrated. So, he could have been at death's door but we'll never know.
Also if you look closely at his fur in those same pictures, it would appear that he's been lying in his own urine.
And those two things show from the pictures the city says proves he's ok. He's ok NOW but he wasn't until people brought pressure on the city to change things.
You are really grasping at straws! Didn't know you were a dog photo expert! Those explanations really are pathetic. You think that you are explaining things in every thing you post on topix, but you are actually making yourself seem more desperate and wrong. Don't you see that? I mean, it's so obvious to everyone else. Yikes!

I agree with the person who stated that people like you cannot ever be pleased because you obviously live a miserable life. Not happy if the dog is fine, not happy if the dog is hurt - honestly! Shame on you!
XXX

Salem, MO

#10 May 15, 2013
Angry With the Mayor wrote:
<quoted text>
No one said Phineas was in pristine condition. No one. They said "good condition" which is a different thing. Look closely at the photos in the local newspaper. They show the dogs with bumps around his neck. Rather than give IV fluids to an animal when they are dehydrated vets often inject the fluids under the skin which looks exactly like the lumps on Phineas. A vet would only do that if the dog were severely dehydrated. So, he could have been at death's door but we'll never know.
Also if you look closely at his fur in those same pictures, it would appear that he's been lying in his own urine.
And those two things show from the pictures the city says proves he's ok. He's ok NOW but he wasn't until people brought pressure on the city to change things.
Oh!! So you're angry that he is in "good condition"? I misunderstood.

I have looked closely at the pictures. The only lump that appears around his neck would be the same roll of flesh that appears on YOUR neck when YOUR head is turned.

I have also looked closely at his fur. It appears thick and full, not like a dog that has been malnurished and laying in his own waste. I'm sure that is disappointing for you to see a dog that is in "good condition" but that is something that you will have to work out with your therapist. Have you ever seen a dog that has been living in the conditions that you describe? They don't recover in 2 days. I'm sure that is disappointing to you also.

Now, what you need to do is call and make an appointment with your therapist and talk about why you have the need to see animals that have been abused. These kind of urges often escalate. Maybe you're starting to feel like YOU want to abuse animals... Please talk to someone about your urges before you put some poor animal through the kind of abuse you crave so desperately.
facepalm

Columbia, MO

#11 May 15, 2013
XXX wrote:
<quoted text>
Wikipedia didn't pick up anything, you moron. Anyone can go on wikipedia and change information. What has happened is, some idiot that lives in some other town has posted this crap on the wikipedia site to make OUR town look bad. When are you going to understand that by spreading all of these lies put out there by this group of radicals, you are endangering the town and the people who live here?
And they ARE lies. Torture, starvation and abuse? Those allegations have been proven false. That is what seems to really piss off this group. The dog is being cared for properly by the city and you idiots are mad because of it. Would you be happier if the pictures came out of a dog that was in horrible shape, starved and beaten? Would that make you feel more justified?
Our idiot mayor is making our town look bad, the wikipedia article just publicizes it further. To an extent, we made our town look bad by electing the jackass in the first place.
Well

Jefferson City, MO

#12 May 15, 2013
Our town looks bad because some jackass posted lies on Wikipedia. Shame on the animal rights activist for using our town as a pawn in their sick political BS! Maybe someone should publish a copy of the facts such as police report, hospital report and photos! Might change a few minds. As far as your opinion on the picture in the paper, your rationale makes you sound ignorant and helped you loose what little credibility that you might have had left. I don't think the owners of the dog are pushing this issue on their own but its a cheap price for the fame they are receiving. Just hope it's all worth it in the end.
They have to look right

Rolla, MO

#13 May 17, 2013
Like I said before in another post, a picture use to be worth a thousand words but now there is Photo Shop.
Dent county

Oak Grove, MO

#14 May 17, 2013
Angry With the Mayor wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't get it at all You just don't and likely never will but I'll give it a try.
Phineas was (and likely IS) being kept in a small crate in the damp and the dark and was refused veterinary care. That is admitted by the city. The Dept of Ag inspector saw that. Unfortunately, in Missouri this is perfectly ok. Most people don't agree with that line of thought. Thus, some see that as torture all by itself.
If you look closely at the picture of Phineas that the local newspaper took, he showed signs of being in the crate too long and in the same position too long. He also showed signs of having been treated recently for dehydration and had urine stains on his fur likely from being in a soiled crate.
All of that qualifies under Missouri law as Class C Misdemeanor and is punishable by law. The Dept of Ag inspector saw the corrected conditions and saw the dog after vet care had finally been provided. That does not cancel out what occurred before nor does it make up for the judge scheduling a hearing and then cancelling it without notifying the attorney's for Phineas.
Are you that attorney for that dog? You don't know Dent County and dogs that bite even if it's for no reason. But Dent County knows a simple lonely man when we hear one.
idiots

Holden, MO

#15 May 18, 2013
I don't exactly think its just the major involved in making the town or county look bad! Lol!! Look at all you morons posting on this dumbass site about a dumbass dog.... Give it up! Everyone is sooooo tired of hearing about the "sweet Lil dog" that shoulda been shot a year ago!
who is guilty

Mount Vernon, MO

#16 May 18, 2013
idiots wrote:
I don't exactly think its just the major involved in making the town or county look bad! Lol!! Look at all you morons posting on this dumbass site about a dumbass dog.... Give it up! Everyone is sooooo tired of hearing about the "sweet Lil dog" that shoulda been shot a year ago!
It's not just about the dog. It's a matter of principle. It makes you wonder about the court system. How many people may have been falsely accused and how many people may not have been sentenced that should have .
RSC

Watsonville, CA

#18 Jul 5, 2013
Salem, MA kills innocent witches. Salem, MO kills innocent dogs.

Fine bunch of people you have leading your town.

Mayor Brown doing the bidding of local thug Kevin Sybert.

Note to self: Avoid Salem, MO
Violet

Milton, FL

#19 Jul 6, 2013
XXX wrote:
<quoted text>
Wikipedia didn't pick up anything, you moron. Anyone can go on wikipedia and change information. What has happened is, some idiot that lives in some other town has posted this crap on the wikipedia site to make OUR town look bad. When are you going to understand that by spreading all of these lies put out there by this group of radicals, you are endangering the town and the people who live here?
And they ARE lies. Torture, starvation and abuse? Those allegations have been proven false. That is what seems to really piss off this group. The dog is being cared for properly by the city and you idiots are mad because of it. Would you be happier if the pictures came out of a dog that was in horrible shape, starved and beaten? Would that make you feel more justified?
The city of Salem, Mo is corrupt. Kevin Sybert so much has proved that with his statement, "Salem was his sandbox and that he knew where all the bones were buried." Salem has committed obstruction of justice, Mr. Sybert is a racketeer and harasses the city officials with his "blackmailing" threats. It is obvious to all outsiders that there is a misuse of political power. They all should be reported for unethical practices. How then should we believe that Salem is any more than a tarnished city?
Violet

Milton, FL

#20 Jul 6, 2013
idiots wrote:
I don't exactly think its just the major involved in making the town or county look bad! Lol!! Look at all you morons posting on this dumbass site about a dumbass dog.... Give it up! Everyone is sooooo tired of hearing about the "sweet Lil dog" that shoulda been shot a year ago!
People that talk like you do usually abuse their children, their wives and anyone else that gets in their way. This is the devils world and you are one of his children.
Violet

Milton, FL

#21 Jul 6, 2013
RSC wrote:
Salem, MA kills innocent witches. Salem, MO kills innocent dogs.
Fine bunch of people you have leading your town.
Mayor Brown doing the bidding of local thug Kevin Sybert.
Note to self: Avoid Salem, MO
I agree!!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 4
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Salem Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Cynthia Howard aka Marchbanks 1 hr o well 4
competition heating up on 4th street 3 hr o well 12
question for keith plank 3 hr Yup 20
The Trump Train stops in Moscow 3 hr Rob 58
Sara weber 5 hr Hmmletssee 3
question for John Cooper 5 hr Lol 61
Election Who do you support for U.S. House in Missouri (... (Oct '10) 17 hr Guest 939
Which Joe overdosed 20 hr Is that you 38

Salem Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Salem Mortgages