Vegan (alt.food.vegan) This newsgroup exists to share ideas and issues of concern among vegans. We are always happy to share our recipes- perhaps especially with omnivores who are simply curious- or even better, accomodating a vegan guest for a meal!

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #16 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 19-01-2006, 01:42 AM posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
rick
 
Posts: n/a
Default typical racist spew from vegans...



snip the racist spew from karen.....



  #17 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 19-01-2006, 02:53 AM posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
John Wesley
 
Posts: n/a
Default PETA KILLS ANIMALS


PETA's Dirty Secret

Hypocrisy is the mother of all credibility problems, and People for the
Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) has it in spades. While loudly
complaining about the "unethical" treatment of animals by restaurant
owners, grocers, farmers, scientists, anglers, and countless other
Americans, the group has its own dirty little secret.

PETA kills animals. By the thousands.

From July 1998 through the end of 2004, PETA killed over 12,400 dogs,
cats, and other "companion animals" -- at its Norfolk, Virginia
headquarters. That's more than five defenseless animals every day. Not
counting the dogs and cats PETA spayed and neutered, the group put to
death over 85 percent of the animals it took in during 2003 alone. And
its angel-of-death pattern shows no sign of changing.

Year Received† Adopted Killed Transfer % Killed % Adopted
2004 2,640 361 2,278 1 86.3 13.7
2003 2,224 312 1,911 1 85.9 14.0
2002 2,680 382 2,298 2 85.7 14.3
2001 2,685 703 1,944 14 72.4 26.2
2000 2,684 624 2,029 28 75.6 23.2
1999 1,805 386 1,328 91 73.6 21.4
* 1998 943 133 685 125 72.6 14.1
Total 15,661 2,901 12,473 262 79.6 18.5

* figures represent the second half of 1998 only
† other than spay/neuter animals
» skeptical? click here to see the proof


On its 2002 federal income-tax return, PETA claimed a $9,370 write-off
for a giant walk-in freezer, the kind most people use as a meat locker
or for ice-cream storage. But animal-rights activists don't eat meat or
dairy foods. So far, the group hasn't confirmed the obvious -- that it's
using the appliance to store the bodies of its victims.

In 2000, when the Associated Press first noted PETA's Kervorkian-esque
tendencies, PETA president Ingrid Newkirk complained that actually
taking care of animals costs more than killing them. "We could become a
no-kill shelter immediately," she admitted.

PETA kills animals. Because it has other financial priorities.

PETA raked in nearly $29 million last year in income, much of it raised
from pet owners who think their donations actually help animals.
Instead, the group spends huge sums on programs equating people who eat
chicken with Nazis, scaring young children away from drinking milk,
recruiting children into the radical animal-rights lifestyle, and
intimidating businessmen and their families in their own neighborhoods.
PETA has also spent tens of thousands of dollars defending arsonists and
other violent extremists.

PETA claims it engages in outrageous media-seeking stunts "for the
animals." But which animals? Carping about the value of future two-piece
dinners while administering lethal injections to puppies and kittens
isn't ethical. It's hypocritical -- with a death toll that PETA would
protest if it weren't their own doing.

PETA kills animals. And its leaders dare lecture the rest of us.
  #18 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 19-01-2006, 03:00 AM posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
John Wesley
 
Posts: n/a
Default two PETA employees charged with 31 felony counts of animal cruelty

You can't deny the truth!



Animal cruelty trial delayed for a month

By DARREN FREEMAN, The Virginian-Pilot
© September 14, 2005 | Last updated 9:52 PM Sep. 13

A court hearing for two PETA employees charged with animal cruelty,
illegal disposal of animal carcasses and trespassing was again postponed
Tuesday.

The probable-cause hearing was rescheduled because a defense attorney
had a scheduling conflict in an unrelated case, Assistant District
Attorney Donnie Taylor said.

The hearing is now set for Oct. 14.

PETA employees Andrew B. Cook, 24, of Virginia Beach and Adria J.
Hinkle, 27, of Norfolk, were charged with 31 felony counts of animal
cruelty, eight misdemeanor counts of illegal disposal of dead animals
and one count of trespassing.

Both have been released on $35,000 bond, and PETA is paying their legal
fees. PETA suspended Hinkle for 90 days and did not discipline Cook.

Police began investigating this summer after carcasses in plastic bags
were found in a supermarket garbage bin in Ahoskie every Wednesday for
four consecutive weeks.

At least 80 animals were found.

Officers say that on June 15 they followed a van after it left Bertie
County’s animal shelter, staked out the garbage bins and arrested two
PETA employees. They found 18 dead dogs in a bin and 13 other animal
carcasses in the van, which was registered to PETA.

PETA had been picking up animals in northeastern North Carolina since
2001, when a caller informed the group of poor conditions in shelters,
according to a written apology PETA President Ingrid Newkirk sent to
Bertie County officials.

Bertie County and Northampton County officials and one Ahoskie
veterinarian said they believed that adoptable animals would find new
homes, while sick, injured and wild animals would be euthanized.

Newkirk has since said that dumping the animals into trash bins violates
PETA policy. PETA typically euthanizes animals in Norfolk and cremates
the carcasses, Newkirk said in a June 17 press conference.

Bertie and Northampton officials cut ties to PETA pending the trials.
The counties are now euthanizing animals without help from PETA. One
veterinarian in Ahoskie is continuing to receive financial support from
PETA to euthanize animals from Hertford County and some from Northampton
County.

Reach Darren Freeman at (252) 338-0150 or
.
  #19 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 19-01-2006, 03:03 AM posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
John Wesley
 
Posts: n/a
Default Washington Times- PETA employees charged in NC

http://www.washingtontimes.com/comme...5338-5284r.htm


Behind PETA's lettuce curtain

By Bob Barr
July 23, 2005

Here's what the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals wanted you
to see this week: two Playboy Playmates -- clad only in lettuce --
handing out vegetarian hot dogs on Capitol Hill Wednesday as cameras
clicked away.
Here's what PETA didn't want you to see: two PETA employees
attending a court hearing Tuesday in North Carolina on charges they
killed and dumped 31 cats and dogs in a shopping center's trash bins.
While the court case is pending, the controversy swirling around PETA
and associated animal rights extremists, is again Page One news.
Veterinarian clinics and animal shelters turned the pets over to
PETA in hopes they could be adopted. Instead, they were killed by an
organization dedicated to "ethical" treatment of animals.
It's just another example of the misguided agenda, and hypocrisy, of
the animal rights movement. It's a campaign that affects not only PETA
and its supporters, but hurts each and every one of us.
In our 21st-century world of wonder drugs and lightning-fast
advances in medical technology, we live longer, healthier lives than
ever. Every day, researchers in hospitals, universities and -- yes --
private corporations like pharmaceutical companies, come closer and
closer to curing, or at least postponing death from, such scourges as
cancer, heart disease, diabetes and mental illness. Like it or not, much
of this progress is achieved by testing cures on animals and not because
the men and women working for such companies are cruel people. They do
this because they view life as precious, devote their professional lives
to preserve it, and because federal law mandates and regulates it.
On the other hand, we have the extreme wing of the animal rights
movement, often operating behind the shield of its more recognized
visage -- People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, or PETA. These
folks believe there can never be any justification for animal testing.
If achieving their goal means humans must suffer, then inflicting
needless pain, trauma, grief and death on people is merely a necessary
means to a worthwhile end. And, a report by the Anti-Defamation League
-- hardly a bastion of extreme conservatism -- says radical
environmental and animal-rights groups have wreaked more than $100
million in damage over the past two decades.
I'll begin with a disclaimer. I like animals. Playing fetch with our
chocolate Lab or watching her frolic with our grandchildren are
activities I enjoy greatly. That said, I also love people. As ethical
and moral creatures, we have a responsibility to care for and show
compassion for all creatures of the Earth. But we also have a duty to
protect our fellow human beings, which includes working to find cures
for pain, suffering and disease.
However, to extreme animal-rights advocates, researchers who work to
this end are not brave scientists fighting to cure disease, but greedy
degenerates who cut corners and torture animals for little or no public
benefit.
To show how wildly inaccurate these assumptions are, let's review
some facts. First, research labs using animals are extensively
regulated. Agencies from the U.S. Department of Agriculture to the
National Institutes of Health regularly conduct surprise site visits,
and no lab director would risk losing funding -- or subjecting
themselves to possible criminal jeopardy -- by flunking an inspection.
Further, major labs employ licensed veterinarians to safeguard the
animals' health.
Another argument often bandied about by animal-rights activists over
a decaf latte in a "Fair Trade" coffee shop turns on the ludicrous claim
animal research makes no real contribution to saving lives. Examples to
the contrary could fill an encyclopedia, but let's look at just one --
diabetes.
Before scientists discovered insulin treatments, there was little
more they could do for severe diabetics than send them home to die.
However, by injecting animals with insulin, they learned to manage the
disease, greatly enhancing quality of life and saving an immeasurable
number of human lives. Ironically, that same knowledge now allows pets
to receive insulin injections, saving the lives of dogs and other
domesticated animals.
Given this reality, there can only be one argument from animal-
rights activists: Human lives are worth less than animal lives. If you
don't believe the animal rights movement's radical fringes actually
think this way, look at what they actually do.
  #20 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 19-01-2006, 03:08 AM posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
John Wesley
 
Posts: n/a
Default More links about PETA

http://www.vancnews.com/articles/200...ews/news07.txt

http://www.wavy.com/Global/story.asp...2&nav=23iibn6m

http://www.roanoke-
chowannewsherald.com/articles/2005/06/21/news/news3.txt


  #22 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 19-01-2006, 04:07 AM posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
Glorfindel
 
Posts: n/a
Default If I Had $40 Million

John Wesley wrote:
In article , says...


He is your chattel property under the law. You have
legal authority to do almost anything you want to him,
short of what is seen as "unnecessary" cruelty ( similar laws
applied to human slaves).


Bull crap. They beat the living snot out of slaves on a daily basis.


"They" who? Slaves were valuable property and it was counterproductive
to injure them "unnecessarily". Yes, some masters were cruel and
irrationally inhumane. Some masters of animals are also, as all rescue
and humane law enforcement organizations know.

If they ran away they cut the fronts of there feet off so they couldn't
run. They worked them in the fields until they dropped. Our animals
are treated 10 times better than most slaves.


You have the legal authority
to have him killed if you wish.


Euthanized if he is sick yes. Killed no. If I shot him I would be
arrested.


Yes, but if you take him in to be euthanized by a vet, the vet can
legally do it even if he is healthy (although many vets won't).

You can dispose of him
to any other person by sale, bequest, or gift.
How is he not a slave?


Slaves are human. Dogs are not human.


Slaves are property. Dogs are property. Their legal status is
the same.


They can't survive for long on
there own (especially mine, he is a chihuahua, hed freeze to death).


Some can, some can't. It depends on the dog.

They need us.


Usually yes. We've made them dependent.

When I was a child I worked on my dads farm. I had no choice. I just
did it. I got food and a nice house to live in. I had loving parents
that took care of me. I couldn't leave. Was I a slave? no


No, you weren't property.


and neither
is my dog.


Yes, he's property.

Hes like my kid. I take care of him and do whats best for
him.


That's nice. He's still property.
  #23 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 19-01-2006, 04:30 AM posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
Glorfindel
 
Posts: n/a
Default two PETA employees charged with 31 felony counts of animal cruelty

John Wesley wrote:

You can't deny the truth!


This is obviously an unusual episode, and, as the article
indicates, was contrary to PETA policy, and not
authorized by PETA.

snip
PETA suspended Hinkle for 90 days and did not discipline Cook.


snip

Newkirk has since said that dumping the animals into trash bins violates
PETA policy. PETA typically euthanizes animals in Norfolk and cremates
the carcasses, Newkirk said in a June 17 press conference.


snip
  #24 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 19-01-2006, 04:47 AM posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
Dutch
 
Posts: n/a
Default two PETA employees charged with 31 felony counts of animal cruelty


"Glorfindel" wrote
John Wesley wrote:

You can't deny the truth!


This is obviously an unusual episode, and, as the article
indicates, was contrary to PETA policy, and not
authorized by PETA.


Do you accept that excuse when animals are abused by workers in the meat
industry?


  #25 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 19-01-2006, 09:11 AM posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
[email protected]
 
Posts: n/a
Default typical racist spew from vegans...


rick wrote:
snip the racist spew from karen.....


Please tell Fidelity you will not do business with them, because of
Paul McCartney's affiliation with PETA who has promoted their agenda
thru hate by appealing to America's cultural intolerance regarding what
animal is not okay to eat:


800-343-3548

Fidelity Investment:

I am disappointed to find out Fidelity have decided to affiliate with
Paul McCartney, and will reconsider doing business with you. As you may
know, last year Mr. McCartney announced his decision to boycott China,
at the urgent of animal rights activists such as PETA.

While I agree animals should be treated humanely by all, especially
food animals each country/culture farms. What I can not agree is the
anti-China message Mr. McCartney and PETA have employed to further
their agenda.

By exploiting our society's cultural intolerance regarding what animal
is not okay to eat, with emotional appeals such as "companion animal"
aimed to project a false perception of China and its 1.24 billion
citizens, not only obfuscate the real issue of advocating humane
farming practice, this position also unnecessarily fosters bigotry
against other's society and culture, and rekindles the racism that was
once rampant in our society.

America has the right to love our pets, but the issue of what animal to
eat is a complex one, especially when crossing the cultural divide. I
hope Fidelity will consider this issue carefully, and evaluate its
support for insensitive speech and actions.

Sincerely,



  #26 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 19-01-2006, 02:55 PM posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
Glorfindel
 
Posts: n/a
Default two PETA employees charged with 31 felony counts of animal cruelty

Dutch wrote:
"Glorfindel" wrote


snip
This is obviously an unusual episode, and, as the article
indicates, was contrary to PETA policy, and not
authorized by PETA.


Do you accept that excuse when animals are abused by workers in the meat
industry?


There's no evidence the animals in this incident were abused. They
were shelter animals transferred to PETA. The technician who
euthanized them was licensed, and they weren't "smothered" as
alleged. The issue was proper disposal of the dead bodies.
  #27 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 19-01-2006, 03:28 PM posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
Dave
 
Posts: n/a
Default If I Had $40 Million


Glorfindel wrote:
John Wesley wrote:
In article , says...


He is your chattel property under the law. You have
legal authority to do almost anything you want to him,
short of what is seen as "unnecessary" cruelty ( similar laws
applied to human slaves).


Bull crap. They beat the living snot out of slaves on a daily basis.


"They" who? Slaves were valuable property and it was counterproductive
to injure them "unnecessarily". Yes, some masters were cruel and
irrationally inhumane. Some masters of animals are also, as all rescue
and humane law enforcement organizations know.

If they ran away they cut the fronts of there feet off so they couldn't
run. They worked them in the fields until they dropped. Our animals
are treated 10 times better than most slaves.


You have the legal authority
to have him killed if you wish.


Euthanized if he is sick yes. Killed no. If I shot him I would be
arrested.


Yes, but if you take him in to be euthanized by a vet, the vet can
legally do it even if he is healthy (although many vets won't).

You can dispose of him
to any other person by sale, bequest, or gift.
How is he not a slave?


Slaves are human. Dogs are not human.


Slaves are property. Dogs are property. Their legal status is
the same.


They can't survive for long on
there own (especially mine, he is a chihuahua, hed freeze to death).


Some can, some can't. It depends on the dog.

They need us.


Usually yes. We've made them dependent.

When I was a child I worked on my dads farm. I had no choice. I just
did it. I got food and a nice house to live in. I had loving parents
that took care of me. I couldn't leave. Was I a slave? no


No, you weren't property.


and neither
is my dog.


Yes, he's property.

Hes like my kid. I take care of him and do whats best for
him.


That's nice. He's still property.


Pet ownership may be analogous to slavery in terms of legal status
but it is not analaogus in a practical sense. Wesley's dog
has, we assume, a large degree of freedom and is no worse off than he
would be in the wild. The relationship between Wesley and his dog
is almost certainly close to the relationship between parent and child
than master and slave.

  #28 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 19-01-2006, 03:29 PM posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
Dave
 
Posts: n/a
Default typical racist spew from vegans...


rick wrote:
snip the racist spew from karen.....


How is it racist?

  #29 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 19-01-2006, 03:32 PM posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
Dave
 
Posts: n/a
Default typical racist spew from vegans...

The real animal related issue with China is not that they eat dogs and
cats,
which are no more worthy of protection than pigs or cattle. The real
issue is the unconscionable way they treat bears.

  #30 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 19-01-2006, 04:48 PM posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
Glorfindel
 
Posts: n/a
Default If I Had $40 Million

Dave wrote:

snip
Pet ownership may be analogous to slavery in terms of legal status
but it is not analaogus in a practical sense.


It is, very much so. If you are familiar with animal care and
control organizations or SPCAs working on cruelty cases, the
perpetrator often can't be charged unless it is proved that
he had legal authority over the animal. Legal status varies,
but is always weighted in favor of the "owner". Last night there
was an episode on "Animal Cops Phoenix" where the humane team could
not remove sick animals from a hoarder because the hoarder would
not allow them to enter the house. The individual "owner" may
love the animal and provide excellent care -- as did some slave
owners for their human chattels. Or the "owner" may provide a bare
minimum of care -- a doghouse in the backyard and a chain. As
long as unnecessary cruelty is not proved, the animal cannot be
removed, even if most of his needs are not met. He can even be
mutilated by cosmetic surgery, as in ear cropping and tail docking,
or killed by the owner (if a cooperative vet can be found, or if
the owner does it himself). It IS legal in most places for an
owner to euthanize his own animal -- it is his property -- as long
as he does it "humanely".

There are a number of books on dog legal status, including _Dog Law_
on the practical facts, and, of course, Francione's _Animals,
Property, and the Law_ on the more abstract level.

Wesley's dog
has, we assume, a large degree of freedom and is no worse off than he
would be in the wild.


He has the freedom Wesley *allows* him. That's the point. He
has no real freedom or rights of his own, and he does not own
himself.

As for being in the wild -- many dog breeds have been so mutilated
by humans for vanity or other human purposes -- like the chihuahua --
that they cannot even survive in the wild. Owners congratulate
themselves on this, but it is little different from chopping off
a person's legs and then congratulating oneself because one provides
a wheelchair.

The relationship between Wesley and his dog
is almost certainly close to the relationship between parent and child
than master and slave.


It may feel that way to those involved, but it does not alter the
legal and ethical status of animals.

Working in a humane organization or shelter is a very difficult
and stressful situation, rather like being the doctor in a
concentration camp. It frequently leads to strange psychological
reactions, as it evidently did in the PETA case, and people either
"shut down" emotionally or snap and go off the deep end. I have
worked as an ACO, and I've seen the dead pile in the back of an
inner-city shelter. It's a terrible situation, and I tend to cut
the people involved some slack.


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
I got a million of 'em Nancy Young[_8_] General Cooking 10 23-08-2015 08:44 PM
Imagine if you could get one million people to give you one dollar.The Internet Million Dollar Donation Recipe [email protected] General Cooking 1 01-07-2012 08:31 PM
FYI: There's still time for $222 Million Andy[_15_] General Cooking 0 27-05-2009 05:41 PM
2.3 million US Soldiers vs 11.7 million Iranian Soldiers = DRAFT 127.0.0.1 General Cooking 11 14-11-2007 05:55 AM
8 million die every year etc. J. Davidson[_2_] General Cooking 0 05-03-2007 12:56 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:37 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2019 FoodBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Food and drink"

 

Copyright © 2017