1 edit
from what i understand phlabby, you put this link up in the chicken accident thread wanting me to provide an explanation:
http://www.consumerfreedom.com/release_detail.cfm?PR_ID=33
here is the essential content of that page:
========================
Anti PETA Television Ads Reveal Group's Darker Side
Animal Rights Group Has Financed Arson and Other Violence
Washington, DC -- A controversial new television ad campaign launched this week by the Center for Consumer Freedom is certain to give the publicity hounds at People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) the sort of attention they don't actually want. The two spots feature a darker side of PETA that will likely shock many of the group's supporters.
The first of two 30-second commercials features a young woman who talks about teaching her children to love and respect animals. But she denounces PETA's support of arson and other animal-rights violence as too extreme and unacceptable.
The second spot highlights PETA's opposition to all medical research using animals, including efforts to find cures for leukemia, multiple sclerosis, and AIDS. PETA even donated $70,000 from its tax-exempt contributions to Rodney Coronado, a convicted criminal who burned down a Michigan State University research lab. PETA president Ingrid Newkirk recently referred to Coronado as a fine young man. The ad shows Coronado, videotaped less than a year after his parole expired, demonstrating to student activists how to build a firebomb.
The Center for Consumer Freedom's ads will begin airing nationally this week on the Fox News Channel.
Visit www.ConsumerFreedom.com to view these new ads. To request a VHS or Beta copy, call (202) 463-7112.
========================
i will give peta's response to this (which i have just received) in the next post and then follow it up with my perspective, since my understanding is that you want it - and besides i want to give it 🙂
you should know though that i am not an employee of peta nor am i even a member nor have i volunteered any money to them. however, i do for almost everything i have seen or heard approve of the way they do their thing.
in friendship,
prad
3 edits
Originally posted by pradtfbelow is peta's official response.
i will give peta's response to this
in friendship,
prad
Thank you for contacting PETA and allowing us to respond to your concerns.
First, I would like to clarify that PETA is an activist organization working to educate the public about the horrors of animal cruelty through peaceful means; we do not engage in activities in which anyone, human or other-than-human, is injured.
Groups like the Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF) and the Center for Defense of Free Enterprise (CFDE) have recently been running scurrilous ads and issuing misleading press releases about our organization, which may have prompted your inquiry. It's not surprising that these groups would attempt to inhibit PETA's vital work for animals (to learn more about the CCF and CFDE, please visit: http://www.consumerdeception.com/quotesby.html) since they are thinly disguised front groups for loggers, cattle ranchers, tobacco interests, alcohol companies and factory farmers.
These groups are understandably frustrated when PETA reveals documentation that bulls are castrated without anesthesia and dismembered at slaughterhouses while still conscious, when we write about yet another scientific study linking animal fat with cancer and heart disease, or when we attack decades-long smoking experiments on animals. In addition to animal protectionists, these groups' targets include National Public Radio, the Centers for Disease Control, Mothers Against Drunk Driving and anyone who would put limits on, or warn of the health dangers of, smoking and drinking.
Alarm bells must have really gone off in their heads when PETA's hard-hitting campaigns persuaded McDonald's, Burger King, and Wendy's to make unannounced visits to their slaughterhouses to ensure humane killing and other improvements in animal treatment. These campaigns have caused a ripple effect throughout the factory-farming industry and have brought some relief for millions upon millions of animals. Corporations know they're going to have to change the way they do business in order to adhere to fast food companies' new rules.
In a last-gasp effort to avoid cleaning up their act, the people who profit from the slaughter of 10 billion animals every year and from the destruction and pollution of parks and forests, rivers and streams, chose the timeworn route of trying to yank their detractors' tax-exempt status. They did the same thing a decade ago, and after a thorough investigation by the IRS, PETA's nonprofit status remained unchanged. What we do, say, and how we spend our money is always legal and open to scrutiny. Our "extensive arrest records" are for civil disobedience, as when we sit down inside a fur store in peaceful protest of animal suffering, in the time-honored tradition of Cesar Chavez, Gandhi, and Martin Luther King Jr. When we gave $1,500 to the Earth Liberation Front press office, it was for help with legal bills for one good animal protectionist who we felt was being harassed and has never been charged with anything at all!
We believe in the right to legal counsel, and that is what we have provided to humane people on a few rare occasions. One example is Rod Coronado, a Yaqui Indian who has defended Native Americans and animals for many years. In America, people are innocent until proven guilty. We felt Rod deserved a defense. Today, he is a very productive member of society, working on a reservation.
Another example is the case of a 60-year-old school teacher, Roger Troen, who accepted some rescued rabbits dropped on his doorstep one night and was later charged with accepting stolen property when it emerged that the rabbits had been taken from the University of Oregon. We turned that trial on its head, exposing the University's hideously cruel practices and the deaths of countless primates there. At the end, the judge said he was ashamed that the U of O was his alma mater.
Animal abusers are terrified of the strides PETA is making in raising public awareness about animal suffering, and they are trying every trick in the book to squelch our right to tell people the truth. It is a measure of our effectiveness that they are feeling so threatened by our achievements, and only inspires us to work even harder for the animals. We will always say what we think, defend animals vigorously, and help the people who defend them. We are grateful to everyone who supports our efforts. I hope this has helped explain our position.
Cool beans, bud!
Just wondering what's up with PETA... I hear a lot of Negative things about PETA... Like them sending mail to Arafat asking him not to blow up Donkeys.....
"Hey, next time you are blowing up people, could you leave the Donkey out of it?"
Not that "that" is what the letter said... but come on, the guy is killing humans here, and PETA is sending a letter asking him not to use Donkeys?
And just to clear one thing up... I don't hold many human lives as "More Important" than any animal's... I myself like animals better than people.... but PETA just seems a bit "Rad and backwards" to me.
P
1 edit
Originally posted by kirksey957hi kirksey! peta does not oppose euthanization in certain situations. for instance, see the 'chicken accident' thread. i can find out more for you if you wish.
Prad, I'm curious as to what a "humane killing" would be for PETA. I guess I was suprised that they would even use that term. Kirk
in friendship,
prad
Originally posted by pradtfI read it, but I was wondering if it would be acceptable to them to euthanize a chicken for food. But I don't know if this would also poison the person eating it if there is sodium penathol in it. But that might make it acceptable if it could not be eaten.
hi kirksey! peta does not oppose euthanization in certain situations. for instance, see the 'chicken accident' thread. i can find out more for you if you wish.
in friendship,
prad
1 edit
Originally posted by Phlabibiti had a copy of the letter somewhere, i'll try to find it if you wish.
Cool beans, bud!
Just wondering what's up with PETA... I hear a lot of Negative things about PETA... Like them sending mail to Arafat asking him not to blow up Donkeys.....
"Hey, next time you are blowing up people, could you ...[text shortened]... . but PETA just seems a bit "Rad and backwards" to me.
P
the gist of the letter essentially asked arafat to 'leave the animals out of it'.
the letter came from an AR organization requesting protection for the animals. that is peta's role.
there are plenty of groups that speak out against killing humans. peta speaks on behalf of the animals.
plenty of peta people have their own opinion regarding war and human rights and do voice it individually, but the organization is there to support animals which is why the letter said what it did.
unfortunately, some people think through some convoluted logic that by asking that the animals be left out of the slaughter, peta is encouraging the slaughter of humans or at the very least not speaking to that issue. however, when we wrote letters for amnesty international, we didn't speak about animals or political prisioners in general - we directed our letters to the specific government regarding the specific prisoner(s).
if this explanation is not sufficient or clear, please let me know and i'll try again 🙂
in friendship,
prad
ps peta is definitely rad(ical), but anythng but backwards. in fact, that is why they do shake things up so much. they bring these issues to the spotlight the way it has never been done before.
Originally posted by kirksey957no i don't think that would be considered acceptable in the human food industry though interestngly enough much of the commercial dog and cat food do contain ground up parts of euthanized dogs and cats. here is but one link addressing this issue (but there are better ones)
I read it, but I was wondering if it would be acceptable to them to euthanize a chicken for food. But I don't know if this would also poison the person eating it if there is sodium penathol in it. But that might make it acceptable if it could not be eaten.
http://www.petcaretips.net/euthanized_pets_in_food.html
if it were acceptable, i would think peta would prefer this form of slaughter to what actually does happen.
in friendship,
prad
6 edits
Originally posted by pradtfbtw, here is the actual letter sent to arafat:
i had a copy of the letter somewhere, i'll try to find it if you wish.
===================
February 3, 2003
Yasser Arafat, President
Palestinian National Authority
Ramallah, West Bank
Palestinian Authority
1 page via facsimile: 972 7 282 2365
Your Excellency:
I am writing from an organization dedicated to fighting animal abuse around the world. We have received many calls and letters from people shocked at the bombing in Jerusalem on January 26 in which a donkey, laden with explosives, was intentionally blown up.
All nations behave abominably in many ways when they are fighting their enemies, and animals are always caught in the crossfire. The U.S. Army abandoned thousands of loyal service dogs in Vietnam. Al-Qaeda and the British government have both used animals in hideously cruel biological weaponry tests. We watched on television as stray cats in your own compound fled as best they could from the Israeli bulldozers.
Animals claim no nation. They are in perpetual involuntary servitude to all humankind, and although they pose no threat and own no weapons, human beings always win in the undeclared war against them. For animals, there is no Geneva Convention and no peace treaty?just our mercy.
If you have the opportunity, will you please add to your burdens my request that you appeal to all those who listen to you to leave the animals out of this conflict?
We send you sincere wishes of peace.
Very truly yours,
Ingrid Newkirk
President, PETA
===================
i have already given my rationale for this letter not suggesting a choice be made between humans and animals in a previous post on this thread. however, i came across a peta reply to these accusations. only problem is i don't know if this is the whole (or even accurate) reply, since i got it from a site (animalrights.net) that was using it to defame peta (and animal rights in general). but i'm glad they had it, so here it is anyway:
===================
PETA opposes violence and cruelty to all beings, but while millions of people and hundreds of organizers work to help the people in the Middle East, almost no one cares about the animals, who also suffer. We at PETA have chosen to work for animal rights because the animals need help -- not to the exclusion of helping people, but in addition to it. Just a few months ago, we did both when we sent a delegation to this troubled spot to distribute healthful vegetarian food to both Arab and Israeli children, bringing a simple message of nonviolence along with nutritious food.
I wish Mr. Muller [who, while writing in defense of shooting animals for sport, probably has not asked Mr. Arafat to stop killing people] had been able to meet one of my fellow PETA employees, Ravei Chand, who worked tirelessly to share a message of compassion for animals. But he is not available for an interview because he is also a U.S. Marine. He has just shipped out with his platoon for the Middle East. He has put his life on the line to defend his country, yet he, like so many in Israel, can see what Mr. Mueller missed: We don't have to choose between people and animals. Indeed, we can care for all.
Make the Middle East safe for people and other living things. Daphna Nachminovitch, The Washington Times, February 25, 2003.
===================
one of the ideas neither this nor my earlier 'defense' deals with is the rather latent possibility that by not abusing animals we may yet learn to not abuse other humans: peace can be contagious, but that's for another post 🙂
in friendship,
prad
I don't know about PETA, but stupid things have been done in the name of saving animals.
Recently there was a security scare at my college. Apparently animal rights activists had threatened to plant a bomb in the college in protest at a primate research centre opening up. I don't think anything actually happened, though.
Here's another example of so-called animal rights activists behaving badly:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/1617919.stm
1 edit
Originally posted by AcolyteAR activists are generally non-violent. however, sometimes certain groups do get frustrated because
I don't know about PETA, but stupid things have been done in the name of saving animals.
a) the there is nothing being done to protect the animals
b) some law has been passed, but it is being regularly broken
c) they have found the only way to direct attention to the issue is to break the law
this should not surprise you. human history is filled with people doing 'stupid things' in the 'name of saving' whatever. often, these 'stupid things' turn out to be very violent and cause deaths. fortunately, i am not aware of anything done by AR activists ever where they have gone and killed people. the fact that they protect animals, necessitates that they not harm humans (however, loathesome they may find them).
some have done damage to property by breaking into research labs, destroying traps and ramming whaling boats. i am not condoning these acts, but even the most non-violent revolution - gandhi's liberation of india from the british - involved horrendous acts of violence that gandhi had no control over. even when the indian people were liberated many butchered each other because of their religious differences. while the analogy is not quite parallel to releasing minks into an environment they aren't supposed to be in in the first place, understand that it is the same 'excuse' the british used (among others) to keep india subjugated. the 'oppressors' however, in each case were correct - the environmental damage will probably be considerable (though probabaly not irreparable) as the minister of animal welfare stated, and the violence between the hindus and muslims reached gruesome proportions just as the british predicted.
none of this stuff is nice, but unfortunate as things are, gains whether they be made between human-human interactions, human-environmental interactions, or human-animal interactions usually involve a price to be paid. it doesn't need to be that way, but do not expect all the oppressed (or their advocates) to just stand on the street corner handing out leaflets while their oppressors have their way. it is easy enough for you and me to engage in pixel discussions, but it is different when one repeatedly has to bear the scars of battle (i know, because i have a few myself, though not from AR).
most AR people condemn acts, as do you, of violence even though, every moment, they have to witness or be aware of its use against those they try to protect. those that eventually do, allow themselves to be driven to it, possibly wouldn't if more people would support the numerous causes rather than argue, intimidate, ridicule the work that is being done.
but i can't say for sure. AR activists are human, after all as they say, and as such they end up doing what humans do. while there may be no right way to do a wrong thing, there are plenty of wrong ways to do the right thing. in that, i suppose AR activists are no different than the rest of us that muddle through life.
in friendship,
prad
while there may be no right way to do the wrong thing, there are plenty of wrong ways to do the right thing.