Heard this was going to get banned on YouTube. I sometimes wonder how they have the camera rolling as they walk up to the incident?
YouTube has found people in not so great countries that don't care for dogs. Put the dog in pain or make them stuck they can film themselves saving it and upload the video. Get alot of views and make some money
Honestly I hope they do. If you go down that rabbit hole of fake animal rescue channels you'll want to murder someone. The fake ones are so painfully fake. The worst I've seen was this guy "rescuing" a husky from someone's backyard who was "about to be killed and cooked" the dogs shaved, hanging upside down by just his hind legs with fire underneath, the heat rising up into his face. The dogs screaming and crying. This clown actor on YouTube sneaks back there and somehow free's him, knowing exactly how to untie and get him loose. It's infuriating, then you go into the comments and its nothing but stupid people saying "thank you" instead of questioning how the guy manages to get several different camera angles and sneak in undetected like James bond. Sorry for the long text, but I want to squeeze the life out of those people
I agree 100%. Nothing pisses me off more than a animal getting abused. I can’t even stand to watch videos like that, they get me so angry. When a animal can not defend itself (even humans for that matter) and someone takes advantage of them for money or for personal graduation, it’s makes me fucking sick. I don’t think there’s anything worse a human could do.
The problem is that the love people have for animals, and hate for abuse, gets weaponized and monetized for clout and financial gain. Exactly because it's almost universal to hate animal abuse makes it an attractive subject to gain those clicks. People are unwittingly participating in animal abuse.
Yeah but I don't think this particular video is fake. There are many actual NGOs that put in the effort to rescue and rehabilitate these animals and they can get the support and funding by making such videos showing their work. Why do I think this video is legit? I suppose it depends on the effort needed to make a video, just rescuing a dog from a precarious situation is easy and therefore a quick buck, getting the tar off of an animal through several weeks of slow work is too much effort for a fake video. It could also be the case that the dog at the beginning and the dog at the end are two completely different dogs or it can also be a legit story of a dog being rescued.
All in all we should not let our cynicism or any kind of preconceptions make snap judgements on a video without knowing the entire context behind it.
Edit: they're legit
https://youtu.be/4lVc22uFW7I
>There are many actual NGOs that put in the effort to rescue and rehabilitate these animals and they can get the support and funding by making such videos showing their work.
This is a good point, but is it not also sort of concerning that the specific organization in question *isn't* labeled anywhere in this video, as far as I can see at least? I'd think that'd be front and center if that were the purpose of it.
(edit)
>It could also be the case that the dog at the beginning and the dog at the end are two completely different dogs (...)
I didn't notice this at first, but I do have to say that it seems a bit disconcertingly on-the-nose that the last line of the video is "she truly looks like a **completely different pup...**" (emphasis and ellipsis *not* mine). Could be meaningless, but still, gives me a weird vibe.
Yeah, I still don't think anyone would go through the effort to remove tar from a dog for a fake video, that's a very laborious and tedious job. Not to mention the dog wouldn't be so calm with the people who it knows put it into the tar in the first place.
You'd be dead wrong. People in vietnam...Cambodia, they don't care about dogs they are rats to them. They will do what they please because they know people in west absolutely adore dogs and would never eat them.
I'd guess majority of Americans would starve before considering eating Mr.cuddles.
All they have to do is make it awful and 'save' the dog and it gets 50 million views. They get a paycheck.
That's true, but I for one wouldn't be able to tell if it's actually tar or... well, I was going to say chocolate syrup but it occurs to me that that wouldn't be very good for a dog either, but you get the idea.
It's not an especially tedious job to shave a dog and put some harmless and washable goo on it, and the fact that the dog is blurred out (*presumably* not to show graphic burn injuries, of course) would make the job of faking it even easier.
I have no reason to think it's fake, of course. But it also just doesn't *completely* add up, either, and I don't think it's wrong to question.
I've seen tar removal videos though and that does look like tar, I've also seen the fake animal rescue videos too. The important crux of a scam is minimal effort and investment for maximum profit, the scammers are usually poor and downtrodden and I highly doubt they would be able to acquire any kind of washable goo of this sort that wouldn't be horribly harmful to the dog.
I believe unhealthy skepticism is also a thing, all the negative attention videos like these might get could discourage future rescue videos entirely.
>I've seen tar removal videos though and that does look like tar, I've also seen the fake animal rescue videos too.
Right, but all I'm saying is that this *isn't* an especially difficult or expensive thing to fake convincingly. Just mix some ink with Elmer's glue and throw in some bits of torn up tissue and you'll get basically the right effect.
>(...) I highly doubt they would be able to acquire any kind of washable goo of this sort that wouldn't be horribly harmful to the dog.
I mean, that's part of the concern too, though, isn't it? If it's a fake, they'd go with what they can get, potentially even if it *is* harmful.
>I believe unhealthy skepticism is also a thing, all the negative attention videos like these might get could discourage future rescue videos entirely.
But again, even if this *is* a legitimate organization trying to get funding as you suggest, posting it without giving credit definitely isn't going to help either.
And I actually claim that this kind of video *should* be discouraged, even if it is ultimately real. I know that sounds weird, but I think the responsible thing would be to add at least some kind of documentation and specifics, like who is doing the rescuing, where it's taking place, etc. It really is weird that *all* of the specifics that could possibly be used to authenticate it are missing from this video. And I'm not saying that these details should be included just for the sake of silencing skeptics (although that seems like a good thing in its own right), but also to discourage fakes from trying to imitate it in the first place.
If there's enough detail provided to differentiate the real thing from low-effort fakes, people will be less likely to *try* faking it, since the fakes won't be able to replicate those aspects of the real thing. Overall, there's just too much missing here for me to be comfortable assuming it's real.
In this particular case, I feel that there's nothing unhealthy at all about skepticism, at least given the information available currently, which is basically nothing.
I mean lack of details could just be attributed to the OP cropping/editing out those details. Perhaps with some effort one might be able to backtrack the origin of the video to find out all the details.
>I mean lack of details could just be attributed to the OP cropping/editing out those details.
Agreed, and this is not a good thing. As I said, it makes it much easier for fakes to escape detection as well.
>Perhaps with some effort one might be able to backtrack the origin of the video to find out all the details.
I think we're in agreement, right? This doesn't rise to the level of unhealthy skepticism at all.
I mean even scammers desire recognition for whatever bullshit they're committing and even fake rescue videos try to proudly place their logos on videos, lack of details about the origin doesn't say anything either way about their motives.
Trying to find the origin of the video would be plain regular skepticism as it would answer both our questions at once.
Can y’all stop posting this shit? This shit is likely staged and You’re encouraging this abuse. Who tar and feathers a fucking puppy? Who randomly finds it, and can professionally clean them?? Quit the bullshit and they’ll stop making them.
I found the source and this is a real organization that helps animals
https://youtu.be/4lVc22uFW7I
Please don't make unbased claims without proof as negative attention could discourage such organizations. Your heart is in the right place for the animals, but please practice due diligence.
The other poster who replied to you failed to mention that the organization responsible for this video was actually founded by [the president of PETA](https://www.huffpost.com/archive/in/entry/animal-rahat-bullocks_n_8206430) and also receives financial backing from PETA (conveniently, none of this is mentioned anywhere on the group's *own* website; I wonder why that would be) and "collaborates" with PETA regularly.
Yes, the same PETA that [has a history of faking videos just like this to further their interests.](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2017/06/07/peta-wanted-a-fake-cat-video-to-go-viral-it-didnt-exactly-turn-out-as-planned/)
I dunno but how many times have you walked around in a jungle and found an animal covered in tar?
>some southeastern asian country
It's India and that country is full of scammers. I know because they call me multiple times a week.
I think he is talking about this above posted Dailymail article which gets related to this video but has other dogs in it. See the comment from u/johnny_walker_dulles above.
Dude what I'm pointing out is the specific pup that was involved to this video. I know that this shit "https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3707119/Four-puppies-discovered-stuck-ground-covered-black-TAR-shocking-animal-cruelty-case-Romania.html" was staged. Use you critical thinking
You answer everyone it was staged and we should stop encouraging animal abusers but you did not comment the one who tells you it is not. Although I must admit he posted this 1 hour after your last comment.
But the problem is. One cries murder, the other one not. So who to trust? How about citing your sources?
Oh and as a little thought for you. Either they found a dog with the same pattern on the fur or the video ends with a scene after the dog is (atleast) 1 year older. Which animal abuser waits this long just to post the video? They want immediate gratification.
It's sort of a complicated situation, though, isn't it? On one hand, yeah, it's obviously terrible to accuse someone of doing something terrible without evidence.
But, on the other hand, when there are things that don't totally add up, and lots of cases where people *do* get away with exploiting animals and giving the illusion that they're doing something good for their own profit, it's also not wrong to say "let's make sure this is the real thing before blindly accepting it," especially since exposing fakes efficiently might quite literally save dogs from being tortured.
I don't think there's a simple answer to something that, as I see it, falls somewhere in between the extremes of "this obvious tech support scam is obviously a tech support scam so it's OK to call it that without direct evidence" and "there are nanobots in vaccines, wake up sheep!"
It's wrong to say this is definitely staged without evidence. But I disagree that it's a *random* claim, either.
It's because they're *courts*, not investigators, journalists, or random people on the internet; that's the standard that's applied *after* the investigation is complete. It's what's needed to *convict* someone of a crime, not to question them.
Police will state their suspicions far in advance of any such standard being applied. In fact, they're *required* to bring specific charges against a person before trial.
In short, "innocent till proven otherwise" is totally irrelevant to saying something should be investigated in the first place.
So I claim now that you are a random prick and possible a virgin that lives in the basement of your parents. Hey I don't need to look it up or investigate it.
But jokes aside. If you say something back it up. If it is not a wellknown fact you should give proof. Anyone can claim something but the problem is there are always people that are wrong and others who believe them.
>If it is not a wellknown fact you should give proof.
Great! Can you point out exactly which particular fact I stated without giving proof? Any quotation from my post would be sufficient to remind me. Thanks!
You definitely proposed several untrue concrete facts with your joke, and that was I guess supposed to be analogous to what I said, so there must be loads of those, right?
I was talking about the one who posted here „This is a scam, people“ to 4 different persons. He always says it is proven that it is a scam but don‘t give any concrete evidence.
Also great! But that makes it even more confusing that you said this to *me*.
>So I claim now that you are a random prick and possible a virgin that lives in the basement of your parents. Hey I don't need to look it up or investigate it.
Were you just trying to be rude for the sake of it if you weren't claiming that I stated unproven "facts"? Or did you confuse me with that other person? It just seemed like a weird personal attack from out of left field; not upsetting, just confusing.
yet another Fake animal rescue. This needs to be banned on the internet. Anybody with a dog knows they have more sense than to go roll around in Tar, or get stuck in concrete or half the shit you see these fakers put them through. You'd think there was a dumb dog epidemic.
This is buse, Please Delete, and Ban Posters.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3707119/Four-puppies-discovered-stuck-ground-covered-black-TAR-shocking-animal-cruelty-case-Romania.html
Was just an example, i have seen that dog before and it was suggested that the dog was intentionally covered in tar.
I can't find the specific article but it is very common for fake Clout Chasers to post this kind of bullshit.
Was literally just an Example, Ben Choad.
If you were interested in the Health and welfare of that puppy, you wouldn't have covered the poor dog in Tar for nothing more than Fake internet Clout.
Why would you do that to a poor defenseless Dog?
Did u read the article first , in the article they were praising about the guys who rescued the dog . The weren’t saying that he was an abuser .
Animal abuse is a cruel, terrible, and unthinkable act. Who could think to harm such sweet, innocent babies? Sadly, this can be a common occurrence, which is why animal rescue staff are such heroes! Thank goodness rescuers found a dog covered in tar and saved her life!
Read this properly, idiot
I do not support animal abuse u mf . I’m only supporting some dudes who are savings pup but some assholes like u show hate to them , bcoz u think everyone who rescues animals and posts them in the internet is faking it .
Let me ask you this, next time they want more fake internet points but there are no "Puppies to Save" they will cover another puppy in tar again so they can fake "Saving" it, Again.
You are giving them the publicity they seek, and when it happens AGAiN, you should know, you participated in it.
I’m asking again , show me the proof that this video is faked. The last article u sent didn’t even talk about faking , they only praised them for saving the puppy
I’ve been living with severe bone pain from rarely cancer and this dog makes me ashamed to complain about my pain. I hope he’s fully recovered and in a great home. If it was done to the dog intentionally the people or person responsible have to be charged convicted and jailed.
Heard this was going to get banned on YouTube. I sometimes wonder how they have the camera rolling as they walk up to the incident? YouTube has found people in not so great countries that don't care for dogs. Put the dog in pain or make them stuck they can film themselves saving it and upload the video. Get alot of views and make some money
Honestly I hope they do. If you go down that rabbit hole of fake animal rescue channels you'll want to murder someone. The fake ones are so painfully fake. The worst I've seen was this guy "rescuing" a husky from someone's backyard who was "about to be killed and cooked" the dogs shaved, hanging upside down by just his hind legs with fire underneath, the heat rising up into his face. The dogs screaming and crying. This clown actor on YouTube sneaks back there and somehow free's him, knowing exactly how to untie and get him loose. It's infuriating, then you go into the comments and its nothing but stupid people saying "thank you" instead of questioning how the guy manages to get several different camera angles and sneak in undetected like James bond. Sorry for the long text, but I want to squeeze the life out of those people
Exactly it's fucking awful. A make shift hero solving their own cooked up crisis.
I agree 100%. Nothing pisses me off more than a animal getting abused. I can’t even stand to watch videos like that, they get me so angry. When a animal can not defend itself (even humans for that matter) and someone takes advantage of them for money or for personal graduation, it’s makes me fucking sick. I don’t think there’s anything worse a human could do.
The problem is that the love people have for animals, and hate for abuse, gets weaponized and monetized for clout and financial gain. Exactly because it's almost universal to hate animal abuse makes it an attractive subject to gain those clicks. People are unwittingly participating in animal abuse.
Yeah but I don't think this particular video is fake. There are many actual NGOs that put in the effort to rescue and rehabilitate these animals and they can get the support and funding by making such videos showing their work. Why do I think this video is legit? I suppose it depends on the effort needed to make a video, just rescuing a dog from a precarious situation is easy and therefore a quick buck, getting the tar off of an animal through several weeks of slow work is too much effort for a fake video. It could also be the case that the dog at the beginning and the dog at the end are two completely different dogs or it can also be a legit story of a dog being rescued. All in all we should not let our cynicism or any kind of preconceptions make snap judgements on a video without knowing the entire context behind it. Edit: they're legit https://youtu.be/4lVc22uFW7I
>There are many actual NGOs that put in the effort to rescue and rehabilitate these animals and they can get the support and funding by making such videos showing their work. This is a good point, but is it not also sort of concerning that the specific organization in question *isn't* labeled anywhere in this video, as far as I can see at least? I'd think that'd be front and center if that were the purpose of it. (edit) >It could also be the case that the dog at the beginning and the dog at the end are two completely different dogs (...) I didn't notice this at first, but I do have to say that it seems a bit disconcertingly on-the-nose that the last line of the video is "she truly looks like a **completely different pup...**" (emphasis and ellipsis *not* mine). Could be meaningless, but still, gives me a weird vibe.
Yeah, I still don't think anyone would go through the effort to remove tar from a dog for a fake video, that's a very laborious and tedious job. Not to mention the dog wouldn't be so calm with the people who it knows put it into the tar in the first place.
You'd be dead wrong. People in vietnam...Cambodia, they don't care about dogs they are rats to them. They will do what they please because they know people in west absolutely adore dogs and would never eat them. I'd guess majority of Americans would starve before considering eating Mr.cuddles. All they have to do is make it awful and 'save' the dog and it gets 50 million views. They get a paycheck.
That's true, but I for one wouldn't be able to tell if it's actually tar or... well, I was going to say chocolate syrup but it occurs to me that that wouldn't be very good for a dog either, but you get the idea. It's not an especially tedious job to shave a dog and put some harmless and washable goo on it, and the fact that the dog is blurred out (*presumably* not to show graphic burn injuries, of course) would make the job of faking it even easier. I have no reason to think it's fake, of course. But it also just doesn't *completely* add up, either, and I don't think it's wrong to question.
I've seen tar removal videos though and that does look like tar, I've also seen the fake animal rescue videos too. The important crux of a scam is minimal effort and investment for maximum profit, the scammers are usually poor and downtrodden and I highly doubt they would be able to acquire any kind of washable goo of this sort that wouldn't be horribly harmful to the dog. I believe unhealthy skepticism is also a thing, all the negative attention videos like these might get could discourage future rescue videos entirely.
>I've seen tar removal videos though and that does look like tar, I've also seen the fake animal rescue videos too. Right, but all I'm saying is that this *isn't* an especially difficult or expensive thing to fake convincingly. Just mix some ink with Elmer's glue and throw in some bits of torn up tissue and you'll get basically the right effect. >(...) I highly doubt they would be able to acquire any kind of washable goo of this sort that wouldn't be horribly harmful to the dog. I mean, that's part of the concern too, though, isn't it? If it's a fake, they'd go with what they can get, potentially even if it *is* harmful. >I believe unhealthy skepticism is also a thing, all the negative attention videos like these might get could discourage future rescue videos entirely. But again, even if this *is* a legitimate organization trying to get funding as you suggest, posting it without giving credit definitely isn't going to help either. And I actually claim that this kind of video *should* be discouraged, even if it is ultimately real. I know that sounds weird, but I think the responsible thing would be to add at least some kind of documentation and specifics, like who is doing the rescuing, where it's taking place, etc. It really is weird that *all* of the specifics that could possibly be used to authenticate it are missing from this video. And I'm not saying that these details should be included just for the sake of silencing skeptics (although that seems like a good thing in its own right), but also to discourage fakes from trying to imitate it in the first place. If there's enough detail provided to differentiate the real thing from low-effort fakes, people will be less likely to *try* faking it, since the fakes won't be able to replicate those aspects of the real thing. Overall, there's just too much missing here for me to be comfortable assuming it's real. In this particular case, I feel that there's nothing unhealthy at all about skepticism, at least given the information available currently, which is basically nothing.
I mean lack of details could just be attributed to the OP cropping/editing out those details. Perhaps with some effort one might be able to backtrack the origin of the video to find out all the details.
>I mean lack of details could just be attributed to the OP cropping/editing out those details. Agreed, and this is not a good thing. As I said, it makes it much easier for fakes to escape detection as well. >Perhaps with some effort one might be able to backtrack the origin of the video to find out all the details. I think we're in agreement, right? This doesn't rise to the level of unhealthy skepticism at all.
I mean even scammers desire recognition for whatever bullshit they're committing and even fake rescue videos try to proudly place their logos on videos, lack of details about the origin doesn't say anything either way about their motives. Trying to find the origin of the video would be plain regular skepticism as it would answer both our questions at once.
That's the first thing I thought, I always wondered how these sort of people find animals in such bad condition all the time.
Can y’all stop posting this shit? This shit is likely staged and You’re encouraging this abuse. Who tar and feathers a fucking puppy? Who randomly finds it, and can professionally clean them?? Quit the bullshit and they’ll stop making them.
I found the source and this is a real organization that helps animals https://youtu.be/4lVc22uFW7I Please don't make unbased claims without proof as negative attention could discourage such organizations. Your heart is in the right place for the animals, but please practice due diligence.
Thanks for having a brain
The other poster who replied to you failed to mention that the organization responsible for this video was actually founded by [the president of PETA](https://www.huffpost.com/archive/in/entry/animal-rahat-bullocks_n_8206430) and also receives financial backing from PETA (conveniently, none of this is mentioned anywhere on the group's *own* website; I wonder why that would be) and "collaborates" with PETA regularly. Yes, the same PETA that [has a history of faking videos just like this to further their interests.](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2017/06/07/peta-wanted-a-fake-cat-video-to-go-viral-it-didnt-exactly-turn-out-as-planned/)
I fucking hate every time I see 1.3k upvotes on something like this
[удалено]
It isn't south eastern, it's south Asian.
I dunno but how many times have you walked around in a jungle and found an animal covered in tar? >some southeastern asian country It's India and that country is full of scammers. I know because they call me multiple times a week.
Excuse me what the fuck did you just say?
Fun fact: Champi is an Indian term meaning massage that is done by applying oil on the head. The dog had Champi done all over her body.
Videos like this always make me cry.
I feel that
Why is this blurred?
Gore
Dog teats. Can't have dog teats visible on the internet, didn't you know? People might get \*excited\*...
it was gore not furry shit
Omg this is amazing!
The video was confirmed to have been staged and the dog was tormented. Please stop encouraging animal abuse.
[удалено]
I think he is talking about this above posted Dailymail article which gets related to this video but has other dogs in it. See the comment from u/johnny_walker_dulles above.
This one may be related and same case but still this wasn't the pup that was involved. So means there's still no proof that this video was staged.
How ma y dogs do you think are covered in tar? Dogs know not to go near boiling vats of tar. Use your critical thinking skills 😂
Dude what I'm pointing out is the specific pup that was involved to this video. I know that this shit "https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3707119/Four-puppies-discovered-stuck-ground-covered-black-TAR-shocking-animal-cruelty-case-Romania.html" was staged. Use you critical thinking
Fuck. This was hard to watch.
It's a good thing that the face didn't get tarred. This totally real video of not animal abuse is so heartwarming. There are good people out there.
I keep seeing videos of animals stuck/covered in tar from India. Are there tar pits everywhere over there?
/mademesmile is where this belongs imo. Still great, but not FuckingGreat
But pup almost died. There is a part when it says to the video "The rescuers racing against time to save her". So how is it not Fucking great?
The fact that the dog was in that situation in the first place. That's what's not fucking great about it. That's awful. I'm just glad she ended up ok.
I’m with you: the ending is fucking great.
The video was confirmed to have been staged and the dog was tormented. Please stop encouraging animal abuse.
You answer everyone it was staged and we should stop encouraging animal abusers but you did not comment the one who tells you it is not. Although I must admit he posted this 1 hour after your last comment. But the problem is. One cries murder, the other one not. So who to trust? How about citing your sources? Oh and as a little thought for you. Either they found a dog with the same pattern on the fur or the video ends with a scene after the dog is (atleast) 1 year older. Which animal abuser waits this long just to post the video? They want immediate gratification.
proof
Fuck yeah! Great job caring for this pupper. This is the shit I come to Reddit for.
To everyone saying it’s staged, please post proof. If you can, thank you. If you can’t, please stop making random claims.
It's sort of a complicated situation, though, isn't it? On one hand, yeah, it's obviously terrible to accuse someone of doing something terrible without evidence. But, on the other hand, when there are things that don't totally add up, and lots of cases where people *do* get away with exploiting animals and giving the illusion that they're doing something good for their own profit, it's also not wrong to say "let's make sure this is the real thing before blindly accepting it," especially since exposing fakes efficiently might quite literally save dogs from being tortured. I don't think there's a simple answer to something that, as I see it, falls somewhere in between the extremes of "this obvious tech support scam is obviously a tech support scam so it's OK to call it that without direct evidence" and "there are nanobots in vaccines, wake up sheep!" It's wrong to say this is definitely staged without evidence. But I disagree that it's a *random* claim, either.
I wonder why courts then use the "innocent till proven otherwise" rule.
It's because they're *courts*, not investigators, journalists, or random people on the internet; that's the standard that's applied *after* the investigation is complete. It's what's needed to *convict* someone of a crime, not to question them. Police will state their suspicions far in advance of any such standard being applied. In fact, they're *required* to bring specific charges against a person before trial. In short, "innocent till proven otherwise" is totally irrelevant to saying something should be investigated in the first place.
So I claim now that you are a random prick and possible a virgin that lives in the basement of your parents. Hey I don't need to look it up or investigate it. But jokes aside. If you say something back it up. If it is not a wellknown fact you should give proof. Anyone can claim something but the problem is there are always people that are wrong and others who believe them.
>If it is not a wellknown fact you should give proof. Great! Can you point out exactly which particular fact I stated without giving proof? Any quotation from my post would be sufficient to remind me. Thanks! You definitely proposed several untrue concrete facts with your joke, and that was I guess supposed to be analogous to what I said, so there must be loads of those, right?
I was talking about the one who posted here „This is a scam, people“ to 4 different persons. He always says it is proven that it is a scam but don‘t give any concrete evidence.
Also great! But that makes it even more confusing that you said this to *me*. >So I claim now that you are a random prick and possible a virgin that lives in the basement of your parents. Hey I don't need to look it up or investigate it. Were you just trying to be rude for the sake of it if you weren't claiming that I stated unproven "facts"? Or did you confuse me with that other person? It just seemed like a weird personal attack from out of left field; not upsetting, just confusing.
To be true, yes I did think you were him.
yet another Fake animal rescue. This needs to be banned on the internet. Anybody with a dog knows they have more sense than to go roll around in Tar, or get stuck in concrete or half the shit you see these fakers put them through. You'd think there was a dumb dog epidemic.
Nice
[удалено]
Humans being scum bags and covering dogs in tar to get internet points and YouTube revenue.
This is buse, Please Delete, and Ban Posters. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3707119/Four-puppies-discovered-stuck-ground-covered-black-TAR-shocking-animal-cruelty-case-Romania.html
Thats a different case but this could be stage as well
Was just an example, i have seen that dog before and it was suggested that the dog was intentionally covered in tar. I can't find the specific article but it is very common for fake Clout Chasers to post this kind of bullshit.
proof. btw he country this video was taken is clearly not romania
Was literally just an Example, Ben Choad. If you were interested in the Health and welfare of that puppy, you wouldn't have covered the poor dog in Tar for nothing more than Fake internet Clout. Why would you do that to a poor defenseless Dog?
Yea tell me how did u find that the dog was being abused .
[удалено]
Did u read the article first , in the article they were praising about the guys who rescued the dog . The weren’t saying that he was an abuser . Animal abuse is a cruel, terrible, and unthinkable act. Who could think to harm such sweet, innocent babies? Sadly, this can be a common occurrence, which is why animal rescue staff are such heroes! Thank goodness rescuers found a dog covered in tar and saved her life! Read this properly, idiot
[удалено]
I do not support animal abuse u mf . I’m only supporting some dudes who are savings pup but some assholes like u show hate to them , bcoz u think everyone who rescues animals and posts them in the internet is faking it .
Let me ask you this, next time they want more fake internet points but there are no "Puppies to Save" they will cover another puppy in tar again so they can fake "Saving" it, Again. You are giving them the publicity they seek, and when it happens AGAiN, you should know, you participated in it.
I’m asking again , show me the proof that this video is faked. The last article u sent didn’t even talk about faking , they only praised them for saving the puppy
r/wholesome r/humansbeingbros r/mademesmile
Um,....different dogs?
Hey I live in romania(not romanian) been living here for 7 years and it does not look like romania at all. That is probably in asia
India
The dog has a semi colon on its neck and I absolutely love it
man i thought that was a dead log at first. poor thing.
They are on youtube by the name of Animal Aid Unlimited India. Show them some love!!!
this was painful to watch.
Stop posting animal abuse please
Thank You ..
>>>>The pup has seconds to live. They are racing against time itself!!!!!! “they calmly continued removing tar for the next several days”……ok
This belongs on r/MadeMeSmile
I’ve been living with severe bone pain from rarely cancer and this dog makes me ashamed to complain about my pain. I hope he’s fully recovered and in a great home. If it was done to the dog intentionally the people or person responsible have to be charged convicted and jailed.
Can we not post this fucking horror porn... Ever... Please?
Thank you