Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
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 | Display Modes |
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
|
|||
|
|||
If I Had $40 Million
From: "Robert Cohen" <notmilk@...>
Date: Sun Jan 15, 2006 2:12 pm Subject: If I Had $40 Million If I Had $40 Million Last week (December 28, 2005), Ingrid Newkirk, the founder and director of the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) was in Bethlehem (Palestine) on her well-financed personal world tour. Dollar for dollar, how many camels or donkeys did she save? How much more peace is there in the world these days after your donations enabled Ingrid to travel from her Virginia home base to the holy land to make asses of her contributors? In 2003, PETA enjoyed a budget of $16,414,174. In 2003, PETA's sister organization, Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM) received $2,667,912 in donations. What have they done with the money? Can you see the results? Last year, PETA and PCRM found that their budgets jumped from just under $20 million in 2003 to over $40 million. God bless their ability to generate funding. So what if more animals per capita are being eaten by Americans? While PETA euthanizes healthy shelter dogs and cats in the back of their killing van, people continue to eat more meat and PETA continues to raise more money by lulling consumers into a false sense of believing that animals are treated better. That they are not is inconsequential to the bottom line. Animal rights business is better than ever! The system is running away from the once good people whose first priority is to now keep their well-oiled money making machinery in prime working order. Here is the formula for animal rights success. Raise one million dollars. Invest half of that to hire more people to raise more money to promise to help more animals. The second round, raise two million. Invest one-million to hire more employees and churn mailing lists to raise more money. Buy Farm Sanctuary's mailing list. Yes, it's for sale. Actually, it's for rent. You can use the list just once before you must pay the fee again. This time, raise four million dollars. Hire more activists to work within your organization. Assign them the task of gathering names and addresses so that your organization can derive income by renting lists. Next round, raise eight million dollars. Throw charity functions on each coast of the United States. Bring celebrities along and award them imaginary plaques for their imaginary work in the animal rights movement. Give them a standing ovation and ask them to pose naked and say a few nasty words about fur. Include details of celebrity events in your next mailing. Be sure to include details of how veal calves were once abused in crates 20 years ago, and represent that this is the state of affairs today. The next young person who approaches me and says "...and calves are kept in crates so small, they cannot turn around..." will get a stern lecture on Farm Sancturary's mailings as they apply to lies and deception. Of course, you'll be guaranteed to raise even more funds by use of lies and clever marketing tactics. And for what? What have we in the AR movement become? Phonies? Liars? Only in it for the money folk who have lost their direction, and now call money raising their number one activity and priority? What has PETA or other organizations done lately for the animals? If I had one-tenth of their budget, there would be 100 million more vegetarians in America. Of course, that would mean that PETA is no longer needed, right? That ain't ever gonna happen. They cannot afford to that that mistake. Ask yourself two questions. First, other than their continuing solicitations to your mailbox for more funds, have you heard anything from or about PETA lately? Second question. Has PETA changed that which is evil or offensive in this world, or have they become a part of it? Is it just PETA? Absolutely not. Money seems to universally corrupt. A few years ago, there was a settlement to the famous McDonalds burger chain lawsuit. It seems that french-fried potatoes were cooked in animal fat. Millions of dollars were distributed to do- nothing vegetarian organizations. One such group's main contribution to the so-called movement is a once per-year summer festival in Pennsylvania to which the same 300 or so people show up every year to eat raw red potatoes and unripened fruit. Another recipient hosts a yearly vegetarian Thanksgiving meal at a New Jersey restaurant. Millions of dollars in hush money, paid to those who hope for a yearly stipend. While one group fought another two years ago amid much publicity (and depositions), have you heard even a hint about how any of these dollars were spent? Neither have I, and I've been searching real hard. Perhaps if I had a million, I could do my investigative work from a lounge chair on a beach in Aruba. Robert Cohen http://www.slaughterhousecam.com |
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
|
|||
|
|||
If I Had $40 Million
Ron wrote:
<snip> > In 2003, PETA enjoyed a budget of $16,414,174. In 2003, > PETA's sister organization, Physicians Committee for > Responsible Medicine (PCRM) received $2,667,912 in donations. > What have they done with the money? Can you see the results? Yes, actually, I can. I can't see why people insist on dumping on PETA. I've been a member since 1984, and in the years since then, PETA has been very important in bringing issues of animal welfare in front of the public, in suggesting alternatives to things like dissection in school, in providing funding and volunteer effort in crises like Katrina and other natural disasters, and in ongoing programs like providing shelters for outdoor dogs. PETA has been central in making the issues visible, from medical lab abuses to abuses of farm animals raised for large corporations, to anti-fur messages, and many more. They are a populist organization, not a scholarly one, and they make no pretense to be anything other than an activist group. More extreme organizations and individuals criticize them, but they are the basic organization that has brought animal welfare/ animal rights (less so than in earlier years) to public attention. They are visible, they make the issues visible, and they have been a major, major factor in bringing hard animal welfare to a position where it is discussed in mainstream media. They have real clout, and they have made changes. They're not perfect, but what organization is? <snip> > Buy Farm Sanctuary's > mailing list. Yes, it's for sale. Actually, it's for rent. That's reasonable. People who contribute to Farm Sanctuary will probably also be interested in PETA -- if they don't know about PETA already (which I doubt). I belong to both, and contribute to both. Most groups work this way -- and PETA is certainly much less obnoxious than some of the charities which have obviously gotten my name off another charity's membership list. <snip> > If I had one-tenth of their budget, there would be 100 million > more vegetarians in America. Really? Prove it. PETA started with 2 organizers and a minuscule budget. If you can do better, show us. Then maybe I'll contribute to *your* organization. <snip> > > Ask yourself two questions. First, other than their continuing > solicitations to your mailbox for more funds, have you heard > anything from or about PETA lately? Oh, yes. All the time. > Second question. Has PETA > changed that which is evil or offensive in this world, Some of it. <snip> |
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
|
|||
|
|||
If I Had $40 Million
|
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
|
|||
|
|||
If I Had $40 Million
Glorfindel wrote:
> Ron wrote: > > <snip> > >> In 2003, PETA enjoyed a budget of $16,414,174. In 2003, >> PETA's sister organization, Physicians Committee for >> Responsible Medicine (PCRM) received $2,667,912 in donations. >> What have they done with the money? Can you see the results? > > > Yes, actually, I can. > > I can't see why people insist on dumping on PETA. Because they're a bunch of grandstanding, self-promoting extremists who are only exploiting animal welfare issues as a way of seeing themselves in the media. |
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
|
|||
|
|||
If I Had $40 Million
SlipperySlope wrote: > Glorfindel wrote: > > > Ron wrote: > > > > <snip> > > > >> In 2003, PETA enjoyed a budget of $16,414,174. In 2003, > >> PETA's sister organization, Physicians Committee for > >> Responsible Medicine (PCRM) received $2,667,912 in donations. > >> What have they done with the money? Can you see the results? > > > > > > Yes, actually, I can. > > > > I can't see why people insist on dumping on PETA. > > Because they're a bunch of grandstanding, > self-promoting extremists who are only exploiting > animal welfare issues as a way of seeing themselves in > the media. PETA didn't start out that way. Hopefully they will change back to what they once were. |
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
|
|||
|
|||
If I Had $40 Million
On Mon, 16 Jan 2006 02:35:20 GMT, John Wesley > wrote:
>In article >, says... >> Ron wrote: >> > > >Yeah PETA was picking up puppies for people in Virginia last year and >instead of saving them smothered them and put them in a dumpster. They >were caught by local police and it made the local paper. Never made >National News. They don't really want to save pet type animals. They want to eliminate them: __________________________________________________ _______ "Pet ownership is an absolutely abysmal situation brought about by human manipulation." -- Ingrid Newkirk, national director, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PeTA), Just Like Us? Toward a Nation of Animal Rights" (symposium), Harper's, August 1988, p. 50. "Let us allow the dog to disappear from our brick and concrete jungles--from our firesides, from the leather nooses and chains by which we enslave it." --John Bryant, Fettered Kingdoms: An Examination of A Changing Ethic (Washington, DC: People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PeTA), 1982), p. 15. "The cat, like the dog, must disappear... We should cut the domestic cat free from our dominance by neutering, neutering, and more neutering, until our pathetic version of the cat ceases to exist." --John Bryant, Fettered Kingdoms: An Examination of A Changing Ethic (Washington, DC: People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PeTA), 1982), p. 15. http://www.acs.ucalgary.ca/~powlesla...ights/pets.txt ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ and people who want to promote decent AW for domestic animals should keep that in mind, much as "aras" apparently do *not!* want them to: __________________________________________________ _______ From: "Dutch" > Message-ID: > > wrote > AW means better lives for animals. "AR" means the elimination of > farm animals, and as much as you obviously want to believe they're > the same thing, they are completely different objectives. Shut the **** up you stupid ****ing moron. Do the world a favour and go blow your stupid ****ing head off with the biggest ****ing gun you can find. ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ >They >just use the money for other things. I'd give to the ASPCA if it were >me. I used to have a copy of the article if I can find it I'll post it. Please do. Here are some that are related to the same thing: __________________________________________________ _______ From July 1998 through the end of 2003, PETA killed over 10,000 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. http://www.petakillsanimals.com/petaKillsAnimals.cfm ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ __________________________________________________ _______ [...] According to the Associated Press (AP) PETA killed 1325 dogs and cats in Norfolk last year. That was more than half the number of animals is took in during that period. According to Virginian-Pilot Reporter, Kerry Dougherty, the execution rate at PETA's "shelter" far exceeds that of the local Norfolk SPCA shelter where only a third of animals taken in are "put down." [...] http://www.iwmc.org/newsletter/2000/2000-08g.htm ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ __________________________________________________ _______ Web posted Friday, April 27, 2001 State Veterinarian, PETA Head Differ On Outbreak [...] On Thursday, Ingrid Newkirk, president of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, renewed her claim that an outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease in the United States would benefit herds by sparing them from a tortured existence and the slaughterhouse. A PETA spokesman said it's inconceivable that anyone would fail to see the sense of Newkirk's statements, which have rankled politicians and livestock farmers from Texas to Canada. [...] In a telephone interview from Richmond, Va., Newkirk reiterated her hope that foot-and-mouth -- which has ravaged herds in Europe -- reaches U.S. shores. ''It's a peculiar and disturbing thing to say, but it would be less than truthful if I pretended otherwise,'' she said. People would be better off without meat because it is tied to a host of ailments, Newkirk said. And animals would benefit because the current means of raising and slaughtering livestock are ''grotesquely cruel from start to finish.'' [...] http://www.pressanddakotan.com/stori...427010026.html ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ >I wouldn't give PETA my surplus dog poop. |
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
|
|||
|
|||
If I Had $40 Million
Ron wrote:
> SlipperySlope wrote: <snip> >>Because they're a bunch of grandstanding, >>self-promoting extremists who are only exploiting >>animal welfare issues as a way of seeing themselves in >>the media. > PETA didn't start out that way. <snip> And they are not that way now. There are a lot easier ways to get money and media attention, if that is what you actually want. |
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
|
|||
|
|||
If I Had $40 Million
dh@. wrote:
<snip> > From July 1998 through the end of 2003, PETA killed over 10,000 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. <snip> To evaluate this data, one would have to know the condition of the animals involved. All humane groups euthanize animals, or they turn over the ones who must be euthanized to other groups which do it for them. Euthanasia is sometimes the most respectful and humane thing one can do for an animal -- or a human. Since PETA is often a last resort, I doubt they get many healthy adoptable animals. They do rescue many, and they do the best they can for the animals under their care, but sometimes the best they can do is provide a humane death. <snip> |
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
|
|||
|
|||
If I Had $40 Million
Karen Winter lied:
> Ron wrote: > >> SlipperySlope wrote: > > > <snip> > >>> Because they're a bunch of grandstanding, >>> self-promoting extremists who are only exploiting >>> animal welfare issues as a way of seeing themselves in >>> the media. > > >> PETA didn't start out that way. > > > <snip> > > And they are not that way now. Yes, they are. That's why there *always* is a huge element of outrageousness to every public act they undertake. |
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
|
|||
|
|||
If I Had $40 Million
Karen Winter lied:
> dh@. wrote: > > <snip> > >> From July 1998 through the end of 2003, PETA killed over 10,000 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. > > > <snip> > > To evaluate this data, one would have to know the condition of the > animals involved. No. *All* you need to know is they have *never* adopted out any pets. They don't believe in it; they believe in killing them all. |
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
|
|||
|
|||
If I Had $40 Million
SlipperySlope wrote:
<snip> > *All* you need to know is they have *never* adopted out any pets. > They don't believe in it; they believe in killing them all. That is absolutely false, as reading any of their literature makes clear, and their track record with rescued animals. You are either grossly ignorant or deliberately lying. The ultimate goal of animal rights organizations is indeed to end the pet trade and allow animals to live free of human domination, which is a form of slavery. But that *never* involves killing of existing animals, except in cases of euthanasia where death is to the benefit of the animal. It *always* means preventing existing "pet" animals from breeding new generations. PETA has much in its publications about proper care of existing companion animal, including an entire book Ingrid Newkirk has written about care of companion cats. PETA is also involved in a variety of outreach and rescue programs for companion animals. |
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
|
|||
|
|||
If I Had $40 Million
|
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
|
|||
|
|||
If I Had $40 Million
John Wesley wrote:
> In article >, says... >>SlipperySlope wrote: >><snip> >>>*All* you need to know is they have *never* adopted out any pets. >>>They don't believe in it; they believe in killing them all. >>That is absolutely false, as reading any of their literature makes >>clear, > Thier record is clear. They Euthanise 85% that come in. Our local > Animal Control has much a better record than that. Which animals are turned in/picked up by your local shelter vs those turned in to PETA? PETA is not primarily a shelter organization; that is not their main purpose. >>and their track record with rescued animals. You are either >>grossly ignorant or deliberately lying. >>The ultimate goal of animal rights organizations is indeed >>to end the pet trade and allow animals to live free of human >>domination, > They would get deseases and die. So do humans. Do you approve of human slavery? (And, BTW, do you have any evidence that human slaves in general receive better health care than free humans?) >>which is a form of slavery. <snip> > >>But that *never* >>involves killing of existing animals > Yes it does. Volunteers were convicted of smothering puppies in > Virginia. I don't believe it. <snip> >>, except in cases of >>euthanasia where death is to the benefit of the animal. It >>*always* means preventing existing "pet" animals from breeding >>new generations. PETA has much in its publications about >>proper care of existing companion animal, including an entire >>book Ingrid Newkirk has written about care of companion cats. >>PETA is also involved in a variety of outreach and rescue >>programs for companion animals. > PETA is evil. They kill pets. No, but they may euthanize animals in appropriate circumstances, as do *all* animal-care organizations. If you disapprove of PETA's criteria for euthanization, then criticize the guardians who turned in animals to them. > They want to turn the world vegetarian. Absolutely. So do I. > That is there real goal. They care nothing about pets. They actually care a great deal about companion animals, as well as all animals. One of their latest publications details a number their programs, which include mobile spay/neuter vans, a program to provide warm doghouses and bedding to outdoor dogs of poor people, an article on the bad aspects of so-called "no kill shelters", their efforts in helping companion animals during Katrina, their program against mulesing sheep, a program to help working bullocks, donkeys, camels, ponies and horses in India with vet and welfare supplies, and several pages on good products for companion animals, including Newkirk's book on _250 Things You Can Do To Make Your Cat Adore You_. Why don't you criticize factory farm organizations? They kill 100 per cent of the animals they hold, one way or the other, after keeping them in very inhumane conditions. |
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
|
|||
|
|||
If I Had $40 Million
John Wesley wrote:
> In article >, says... <snip> >>Which animals are turned in/picked up by your local shelter vs those >>turned in to PETA? PETA is not primarily a shelter organization; >>that is not their main purpose. > Then why do they take in animals Because the animals need to be removed from their existing situation. > and put 85% of them to sleep. This is > there own reported number. Because the animals would be better off humanely euthanized than in their existing condition. <snip> >>>They would get deseases and die. >>So do humans. Do you approve of human slavery? > > Again my dog does no work for me. He picks no cotton. Because you do not assign him any. If you did, he could not refuse, or you could punish him. Many dogs *do* work. > How is he a > slave. 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). You have the legal authority to have him killed if you wish. You can dispose of him to any other person by sale, bequest, or gift. How is he not a slave? >He has better medical care than I do. He has a wonerful bed to > sleep in inside a heated house. He eats all the food and treats he > wants. Anyone who compares that to slavery is a certified nut case and > needs to have some mental help. Some slave concubines were similarly cherished and cared for. How a slave is treated has nothing to do with his legal/social status as a slave. It is your choice to treat him well or chain him in the back yard. <snip> >>>Yes it does. Volunteers were convicted of smothering puppies in >>>Virginia. >>I don't believe it. > I have the article around here somewhere. Its on the net. where. And who were these "volunteers"? <snip> >>Why don't you criticize factory farm organizations? They kill >> 100 per cent of the animals they hold, one way or the other, >> after keeping them in very inhumane conditions. > Because I like to eat them animals. They taste goooood!!!!!!!!! My dog > does too! Some people like to eat dogs. If you lived in a culture where that was common, you could do the same, because your dog, like a chicken cow or pig, is your property. It is a cultural choice which species are food, and which "pets". There is no rational basis for the choice. |
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
|
|||
|
|||
typical racist spew from vegans...
snip the racist spew from karen..... |
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
|
|||
|
|||
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 ğ 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. |
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
|
|||
|
|||
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 İ 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 Countys 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 . |
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
|
|||
|
|||
If I Had $40 Million
|
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
|
|||
|
|||
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> |
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
|
|||
|
|||
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? |
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
|
|||
|
|||
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, |
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
|
|||
|
|||
typical racist spew from vegans...
rick wrote: > snip the racist spew from karen..... How is it racist? |
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
|
|||
|
|||
typical racist spew from vegans...
"Dave" > wrote in message oups.com... > > rick wrote: >> snip the racist spew from karen..... > > How is it racist? >=========== Comparing slaves, which in this country and in her comparisons are black to dogs. That you don't see comparing them to animals as racist says alot... |
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
|
|||
|
|||
two PETA employees charged with 31 felony counts of animal cruelty
"Glorfindel" > wrote in message ... > 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. ====================== ROTFLMAO Death isn't abuse. What a hoot!! |
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
|
|||
|
|||
typical racist spew from vegans...
rick wrote:
> "Dave" > wrote in message > oups.com... >>rick wrote: >>>snip the racist spew from Glorfindel..... >>How is it racist? >>=========== > Comparing slaves, which in this country and in her comparisons > are black to dogs. There were slaves of other ethnicities even in "this country," and historically there have been slaves of every ethnic group. How about the blond, blue-eyed British, German, and Irish slaves of the Roman Empire? Your lack of historical education ( not to mention grammar) is showing. It is the legal status of slaves which is analogous to the legal status of animals: both are chattel property. <snip> |
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
|
|||
|
|||
typical racist spew from vegans...
"Glorfindel" > wrote in message ... > rick wrote: >> "Dave" > wrote in message >> oups.com... > >>>rick wrote: > >>>>snip the racist spew from Glorfindel..... > >>>How is it racist? >>>=========== > >> Comparing slaves, which in this country and in her comparisons >> are black to dogs. > > There were slaves of other ethnicities even in "this > country," and historically there have been slaves of every > ethnic group. How about the blond, blue-eyed British, > German, and Irish slaves of the Roman Empire? Your lack > of historical education ( not to mention grammar) is showing. > It is the legal status of slaves which is analogous to the > legal status of animals: both are chattel property. > > <snip> ========================= All racists try to cover their hatred... You're not doing a very good job. Your comparisions are bogus. Thanks for proving you have nothing, should I also submit posts to you for spell-checking too? > |
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
|
|||
|
|||
two PETA employees charged with 31 felony counts of animal cruelty
> 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. > Are you crazy. It was stated they were smothered. Thats why they are being charged with 31 felonies. They were found in a dumpster near where they took the animals. They were puppies and the people who turned them in were told they were being put up for adoption. You are in denial. jw |
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
|
|||
|
|||
two PETA employees charged with 31 felony counts of animal cruelty
|
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
|
|||
|
|||
If I Had $40 Million
|
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
|
|||
|
|||
If I Had $40 Million
John Wesley wrote:
> In article .com>, > says... >>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. > Thanks, For what? > Glorfindel will never get it. I certainly "get it." It is the way I feel about my own companion animals, and why there is a movement today to replace "pet owner" with "companion animal guardian" as the preferred term. But until the *legal* status of animals changes -- until they are no longer property -- nothing will really change. |
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
|
|||
|
|||
If I Had $40 Million
In article >, says...
> John Wesley wrote: > > In article .com>, > > says... > > >>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. > > > Thanks, > > For what? For having an intelligent response! > > > Glorfindel will never get it. > > I certainly "get it." I don't think you do, but at any rate I'm growing tired of this. jw |
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
|
|||
|
|||
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, You have no way of knowing that, Karen. > and, as the article > indicates, was contrary to PETA policy, Correction: the article quotes PeTA as *saying* that it was "contrary to PeTA policy". You don't know what their policy is, and what else would they say in that situation? >> PETA suspended Hinkle for 90 days and did not discipline Cook. > > > <snip> "snip" is right, Snip Queen Karen. Not surprising you don't have a comment about the slap on the wrist. > >> Newkirk has since said that dumping the animals into trash bins >> violates PETA policy. OF COURSE she would say that. >> PETA typically euthanizes animals Exactly. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
I got a million of 'em | General Cooking | |||
Imagine if you could get one million people to give you one dollar.The Internet Million Dollar Donation Recipe | General Cooking | |||
FYI: There's still time for $222 Million | General Cooking | |||
2.3 million US Soldiers vs 11.7 million Iranian Soldiers = DRAFT | General Cooking | |||
8 million die every year etc. | General Cooking |