PETA Euphemizes as it ‘Euthanizes’
Asked about the staggering number of dogs, cats and other animals that PETA kills at its headquarters in Virginia, Daphna Nachminovitch told Newsweek:
“We would rather offer these animals a painless death than have them tortured, starved, or sold for research.”
How nice of them to “offer” the animals a nice death rather than the risky choice of life in a new family home. I wonder how Ingrid Newkirk and Daphna Nachminovich, her spokesperson on pet issues, make this offer? Do they explain to Fido and Fluffy that they’d be better off dead than running the risk of their new family torturing and starving them?
And do Fido and Fluffy then have a choice? (“Thanks for the offer, Ingrid. Sounds like a plan.”)
With a budget well over $35 million a year, is the world’s largest animal “rights” organization truly incapable of finding homes for the dogs and cats they personally rescue? Do all the potential homes seem to be filled with secret sadists masquerading as happy families?
Oh please!
Finding homes for homeless pets is not rocket science. When scientist Frank Peek and his wife, Aileen, retired, they decided to do something for stray dogs in the remote region of Southern Colorado where they live. Frank and Aileen used their savings to build a shelter next to their home. They started a spay/neuter program, and they began gathering up homeless dogs from underprivileged areas far and wide. Twice a month, Aileen drives 30 or more of the dogs to Colorado Springs – a three-to-four-hour journey – where volunteers meet them at a PetSmart store to help with the adoptions. They place most of them in good homes – more than 700 a year.
(And to the best of their knowledge, none of the adopted dogs have later been tortured, starved or sold to research.)
Last year, with its huge budget, PETA took in 778 dogs – about the same number as Frank and Aileen. They killed 713 at their offices, and found homes for 19. Others were handed over to a local shelter, where they, too, may have been killed. PETA also took in 1,214 homeless cats and killed 1,198 of them. And their report to the Virginia Department of Agriculture shows that they took in 58 other companion animals – rabbits, hamsters, etc. – and killed 54 of them.
(The 2011 report is here. And earlier reports can be accessed here.)
None of this should be news to any of us in the world of animal protection. Killing homeless pets has been Ingrid Newkirk’s modus operandi since the time when she held the job of killing animals at the Washington Humane Society. Exactly what is the psychology that lies behind her philosophy that they’re all better off dead is something many of us have speculated on. But more urgent right now is the need simply to stop the killing – and the Kool-Aid madness to which PETA staffers meekly subscribe. (Those who disagree with the policy apparently get fired.)
The rights of animals
The single primary obligation of any animal rights organization is surely to protect the lives of the animals you rescue. If PETA can’t even give the animals in their own office the right to life, then there’s little else we can expect them to be able to accomplish in the long run.
Newkirk and Nachminovich know perfectly well that on any given day there are millions of good homes available. If these two women seriously think that new families they screen and visit are still likely to be closet torturers, they need to get out of the animal rescue business altogether.
If they think it costs too much time or money to find good homes, then they could cut back a bit on a few of those “I’d rather go naked than wear fur”billboards. Frankly, the ads can’t be working very well since the fur industry seems to be no closer to shutting down than it ever was.
Sadly, PETA’s killing machine has been a gift beyond imagining to the so-called Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF), a lobbying group for the animal exploitation industry. Every year, its executive director, Rick Berman, publicizes the report that PETA, which is a registered “shelter” in the state of Virginia, sends in to the state Department of Agriculture.
Berman is actively lobbying for PETA’s headquarters to be labeled as a “slaughterhouse” rather than a shelter. It’s hard to disagree with him.
But while Berman and his lobbyists take PETA to task, the animal protection world keeps largely silent. Is that because humane groups feel powerless in the face of PETA’s big, bold lies, its Orwellian propaganda machine, and its frequent threats of lawsuits? Or perhaps that we feel obliged not to police our own movement in case we appear to be divided?
Whatever the reason for our continued silence. Newkirk and Nachminovich keep getting away with it. And with the blood of so many thousands of animals on their hands, and all the guilt that they have to bury under mounds of rationalizations and justifications, these two Lady Macbeths are probably incapable of stopping on their own. Just for starters, they’d have to admit to themselves that all those homeless pets never needed to be killed in the first place.
No, the only way PETA is ever going to stop the killing spree is when the rest of the humane world brings concerted pressure on it. PETA may have the bigger propaganda machine, but over the past 20 years, the no-kill movement has been hugely successful in bringing down the numbers of dogs and cats being killed in shelters. Spay/neuter and adoption programs have flourished. And while there’s still more work to be done, the wind is in our sails.
With nothing more than their personal retirement budget and some small adoption fees, Frank and Aileen Peek are rescuing, caring for, and rehoming the same number of homeless pets each year that PETA kills. With that in mind, it is surely time for all of us – shelters and animal protection organizations of every size and stripe, along with our members – to speak up with a single, united voice against this travesty, and to shame PETA, if that’s what it takes, into stopping this unconscionable madness.
Posted March 1, 2012, by Michael Mountain
Just wanted to alert you to "PETA's Death Cult," the first part of an exposé I'm writing for the Huffington Post on PETA's lust for euthanasia. It would be useful to have some of you contribute to the comments section. (At the moment we're being spammed by Newkirk's minions.) The article is online here: http://huff.to/zl6TBe
dysmedia
Thanks for helping to expose them!
What PETA did at the Caboodle Cat Ranch in Madison County, Florida was unforgivable. The slick, slimy little PETA spy infiltrated the cat rescue pretending to be a volunteer. She was SUPPOSED to be cleaning and helping to give animals their medicine. Instead, she took pictures of areas before they were cleaned to prove "filth" and of the sick animals that were being treated with medicine from the vet as proof they were "abusing and neglecting animals." She even accompanied volunteers who took animals to the vet. Can you believe the nerve of the woman? It took her five months to compile enough garbage to "justify" a raid on the ranch. I absolutely LOATHE PETA. I wouldn't give that gang of terrorists and thugs one cent of my money. If you really want to help animals, give to your LOCAL no kill animal shelter or pet rescue. Do not give your money to PETA to help finance any more raids on people who are trying their best to save animals lives. Do not give to the Humane Society of the US either. They are equally as bad and they give less than one percent of all the money they rake in to the upkeep of animals.
What will happen to the hundreds of Caboodle cats that were taken by PeTA? This has got to stop!They also took Nanette's pets. Her fur babies had NOTHING to do with the shelter! They were there for only 2 weeks while she came to help....
PETA should just get out of the companion animal rescue world, period. They don't believe in them (if I understand their philosophies correctly) and clearly they are misguided in what rescue actually means. "Dead" doesn't seem like the same thing to me as "saved."
Fascinating - in a home with 3 retired racing greyhounds (and one foster waiting to be spayed before going to her new home) who are typical of the 50 or so we have had in our home over the years, we've been bothered extremely by PETA and their ilk's attacks on the racing industry (search PETA greyhound racing and you'll see their look at these killers postings - how does the look in the mirror feel?). No, we do not race our dogs, they are retired and then come to our home. Animal lovers, not animal industry people. We do volunteer with a greyhound group, and we have been to the tracks and met owners, breeders and trainers. I'm sure there are a few, like an equivalent segment of all people, who are evil, abusive and harm their racing dogs. But not those we've gotten to know. Yes, their dogs are a business, but when they are retired they go to people like us, not to a kill shelter. And retirement groups like ours take the dogs back for any reason and rehome them - with volunteers like us taking in returned dogs until they find new homes. Period. We've had old dogs, in their last months of their lives, come back and cared for with dignity (both our adoption group and us personally), and trust me when I note that we don't have million dollar budgets and go to great lengths, as a group and personally, to see that these animals are treated well until their last. These are groups of all volunteers, with no budgets, who are in it for the life and health of the animals. Unlike PETA, we don't condemn an industry that does care for their charges and have made great strides to be sure every dog possible ends up adopted, with dedicated volunteers who make it happen. PETA, not so much, contrary to their claims. You can guess where our efforts and gift dollars go...
JohnKahlerHAVE YOU BEEN ABLE TO SEE THE MAMY GREAYHOUND RACING DOGS AT WHERE THEY ARE HOUSED KEPT? THERE IS IN FACT MANY THAT ARE NEGLECTED AND ABUSED WHEN THEY DO NOT MAKE THE CUT. THEY LIVE IN SMALL CAGES AND SUFFER TERRIBLE LIFES. I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THERE SHOULD BE A GREYHOUND RACING INDUCTRY AT ALL. GREY2K USA HAS TONS OF INFO THAT SURE LEADS ME TO BELEIVE THAT THIS IS A MERE GREED INDUSTRY.......JUST LIKE THE HORSE RACING IN FLORIDA. THESE HORSES ARE SOLD FOR ALMOST NOTHING OR GIVEN AWAY WITH MANY HORSES ENDING UP BEING DUMPED ON ABANDONED FENCED PROPERTY WHERE MANY STARVE TO DEATH. JUST AS MANY GREYHOUNDS THAT ARE NOT MAKING THE INDUSTRY MONEY ARE OFTEN DUMPED IN GARGAGE TUMPS. THEY OWE IT TO THE DOGS & HORSES TO RETIRE THEM IGOOD HOMES OR NOT HAVE THESE ANIMALS AT ALL.
PJDee Hello. First, if I may, all caps = yelling on the net which is neither courteous nor makes your point.
I have been at several tracks, as well as a puppy farm though certainly not all, and know others who help in retirement. In the kennels and other areas of the tracks, behind the scenes. While, like other people, there may be evil and abusive owners and trainers, the kennels are clean and the dogs are treated well. Can't say this is the case always, every time, everywhere, but there are any number of animal owners who abuse their animals, dumping the when they don't want them. Compare that to the racing owners who work with numerous adoption groups to insure when the dogs are no longer racing they go to forever homes.
After having well over 50 greyhounds in our home, foster dogs right off the track to those who we have adopted, I can think of only one who was messed up, and that one was an AKC not racing dog, owned by a woman who was an animal hoarder, not a racing owner or trainer. The dogs have appropriately sized crates, as do we for our own. The crates we have are always open when we at home, and the dogs will often be found there, sleeping and hanging out, of their own accord. Since the crates are in our bedroom, at bed time - if they're not there already - they often wander up and go in their crates. When we leave the house, they know to head for the crates and prepare for a nap while the people are away, often going in before we can remove their collars and refresh their water. By their own choice. No animal would do this of their own accord if a crate was equated to abuse.
If these animals were as neglected and abused as you say, they would not be the sweet and happy animals they are. Even right off the track, where they come to our home, they adjust right in. We know many others who have the same experience, again and again. Even more, my wife in a previous career was a veterinary technician, and experienced animals which were neglected and abused. She knows what neglect and abuse look like, and except for the one AKC dog (who by the way was taken away by the courts and placed with us specifically because of my wife's experience) we have not seen dogs who show such symptoms.
They do not end up in garbage dumps, retired racers end up being placed through adoption groups into homes like ours where they are happy and live their retired lives well. And, through agreements with the racing owners and the adoption groups, the adopters agree if they do not want the dog, for any reason, they are returned to the adoption group where they are cared for until they are found a new home. Not dumped, not tossed, but treated with dignity and cared for. Through the efforts of the owners and those who work in adoption and adopt the dogs. Sure, this is not 100% of the time with 100% of the animals - as I said, there are evil and cruel people in this world. But I know by personal experience and the experience of others, who have no interest and receive no gain from racing, just the experience of sharing our homes and lives with these quiet, gentle and happy animals, that they end up exactly as you wish they would. The 4 dogs (3 adopted and one a foster waiting for her home) around me would no doubt agree, that is if they weren't happily napping, A retirement I could go for some day.
Folks, dont let the PETA plant get under your skin. They know they have been exposed as animal killers, and now they are in "public relations repair" mode.
The No Kill Equation is a proven program, that saves lives, despite PETA's lies.:
http://www.nokilladvocacycenter.org/shelter-reform/no-kill-equation/
Well said, Michael. PETA is either:
1. Not on the same frequency as reality
2. Knowingly lying and saying ridiculous things.
3. A little bit of both.
This we DO know: PETA are unethical, Companion Animal killers, and that says all that we need to know about the pathetic PETA disgraces. Their apologists can stay in Wonderland if a blissful ignorance makes them happier than a harsh reality, but ignorance doesnt change reality.
Anyone with an open mind knows that PETA are fraudulent for claiming to be "ethical" while being devoid of ethics.
And anyone who defends the killers of innocents, are as delusional as PETA.
The No Kill Equation is a proven program, that saves lives, despite PETA's lies.:
http://www.nokilladvocacycenter.org/shelter-reform/no-kill-equation/
· From PETA's website, for those who have open minds:
http://www.PETA.org/b/thepetafiles/archive/2012/02/20/a-gentle-hand-for-the-toughest-cases.aspx
· http://www.PETA.org/b/thepetafiles/archive/2011/02/03/an-open-door-for-animals-in-need.aspx
· http://www.PETA.org/b/thepetafiles/archive/2011/02/01/the-stories-behind-the-statistics.aspx
· http://www.PETA.org/b/thepetafiles/archive/2010/02/12/placing-the-blame-where-it-belongs.aspx
PETA is on the front lines in the battle against animal homelessness. Our field workers are on duty around the clock, and our emergency pager is always on. During hurricanes, snowstorms, heat waves, and cold snaps, we are out helping cats stuck in tree tops and drainage ditches, ducklings stranded in sewer pipes, and dogs left to die at the end of a chain—any animal who needs help, anytime and anywhere. Some of the animals we take in are lost companion animals—we eventually reunite them with grateful guardians, while others are taken to local agencies where they will have a chance to be adopted. PETA helps guardians keep their animal companions by offering counseling tips, helping to find animal-friendly housing, and assisting in providing humane care. We do not run a traditional adoption facility; PETA is a shelter of last resort. We also take responsibility for the animals nobody wants—the sick, the scarred and broken, the elderly, the aggressive and unsocialized, and the perfectly healthy ones who are thrown away like last year’s fad toy. We do everything in our power to help these animals. We treat their injuries if we can, we feed them, we love them with all our hearts, and we give them a safe place to rest, if that’s what they need. Sometimes they need the comfort of being put out of their misery—a painless release from a world in which they were abused and unwanted.
PETA is not alone in this work: Millions of homeless animals are euthanized in animal shelters and veterinary offices across America because of simple math: too many animals, not enough suitable homes. As many as 8 million animals flood U.S. animal shelters annually, and half must be euthanized. Even if those 8 million animals could be placed with loving families, there would be 8 million more the next year, and the year after that.
The answer lies in prevention. We must stop irresponsible guardians, backyard breeders, and puppy-millers who churn out litters without a thought as to where these helpless animals will go. PETA runs three mobile spay-and-neuter clinics, serving low-income residents in Virginia and North Carolina. The clinics offer free and low-cost sterilization surgeries as well as other services, such as flea and tick treatments, vaccinations, and deworming. Since starting our first mobile clinic in 2001, we have sterilized nearly 80,000 animals, including 10,564 in 2011 alone.
You can help: Please go to https://secure.PETA.org/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=2875 to send a letter to your state’s governor asking him or her to make spaying and neutering mandatory statewide. Not only do they save lives, mandatory spay-and-neuter laws also make good fiscal sense: Taxpayers pay approximately $2 billion to house, euthanize, and dispose of unwanted dogs, cats, and other animals in the U.S. each year.
Finally, please know that a lot of the misleading and outright false rumors that are spread concerning our efforts are the work of the deceitfully named “Center for Consumer Freedom” (CCF), a front group for Philip Morris, Outback Steakhouse, KFC, cattle ranchers, and other animal exploiters who kill millions of animals every year—not out of compassion, but out of greed. To learn more about CCF—whose website USA Today said should be renamed “FatforProfit.com”—please see the following websites:
@oaktree Um...you couldn't find so much as one NON PETA source to defend your position? Lol
oaktree
Dear Oaktree, We'll let your comment stand, but you haven't begun to address the fact that you guys kill more than 90 percent of the animals you take in. What about the puppies you took from a North Carolina shelter after promising to find them good homes, and, instead, killed them and dumped their bodies in a trash bin behind a supermarket. You were caught and arrested and then convicted. Those puppies were not, by any standard, unadoptable.
And what about the dogs from Michael Vick. You advocated very strongly for all 48 of them to be killed. The judge disagreed. 47 were saved. Many of those are in good new homes today. Others are in good foster homes and sanctuaries.
Please don't just trot out the party line PR. You do yourself a disservice on this site. You should know better. Think for yourself. Thank you.
oaktree
MANY rescues are doing the same thing "you" and PETA are doing, they just don't have to slaughter the animals. Many of us do it on our own dime, without all the funding PETA has.
oaktree bullshit
oaktree "misleading and outright false rumors" ???? This report about PETA's kill rate is from VA Dept of Agriculture & Consumer Services. Public record, not rumor.
oaktree
Did you read these parts? How is this open minded?PETA doesn't think any of us should have pets.
http://www.peta.org/about/why-peta/pets.aspx
PETA doesn't think any breeder can be responsible.
http://www.peta.org/about/why-peta/responsible-breeders.aspx
Newkirk sent Winograd a postcard that says they do not advocate "right to life" for animals. This is antithetical to animal rights/protection.
I thank Michael for calling on organizations and their members of every size and stripe to speak up and bring attention and pressure upon PETA until no animal will be put in their hands again.
I'm sorry I donated to them already this year. Until they change their tune, that was the last donation they'll be seeing from me. Thanks for bringing this to light - they certainly don't put that up on their billboards!
EllieGomez
You just donated!!! Then you didn't do your homework. PETA has been killing animals as a first resort for many years.
EllieGomez PETA doesn't need your money. They have plenty. But please look beyond this ridiculous brouhaha, possibly far overblown fact-wise, over a few thousand old and ill dogs and cats. There are far more important animal issues, and PETA is one of the few big guns with enough firepower to challenge the deep pockets of the animal exploitation industries. Those industries are laughing all the way to the bank when animal people fight each other. Aren't we better than that?
@oaktree @EllieGomez So you are saying the end justifies the means...
oaktree If you start compromising the very principles you claim to be fighting for, you're no better than the those you're fighting. I supported PETA for the last few years BECAUSE they took on those others were too afraid to confront, despite some of their methods being questionable, in my humble opinion anyway. But as has been stated above and in the comments, they certainly have the money to rehabilitate/rehome/take care of 700 dogs and 1200 cats, ESPECIALLY if they were ill. How do you excuse their killing of those that needed them most???? That's were they should have stepped up to the plate and shown their true selves; I'd say they succeeded only in the latter. If you want to see real compassion against all odds, look at Best Friends' amazing rehabilitation of the Vick dogs. As I recall, PETA wanted them all euthanized...
EllieGomez I am simply someone who knows that life is not always better than death. A suffering being deserves to be set free if the quality of life is gone. It's what I would want for myself, and I would give my animals no less. If that is what PETA did with these animals, who may have had a poor quality of life, then I support their decisions. Since I wasn't there, and neither were any of you, we simply do not know all the details, and that's why it's unfair to judge a group that has greatly expanded the awareness of animal rights. 'Nuff said. I'm done. I won't be one of those animal people who keeps badgering other animal people into seeing things the way I do. Let's all go back to helping animals in whatever way our consciences ask us.
oaktree There are few details as to what happened with these animals (and I'm sure PETA wanted it that way), because a year or two ago they were caught "adopting" perfectly healthy dogs (including puppies) from shelters and euthanizing them. You can find the links for various of these instances here: http://www.nokillnow.com/PETAIngridNewkirkResign.htm and many other places on the web.
I hope you don't feel targeted, this is a good debate among people with the same goal - helping animals in need. But I think it is important to work in honesty and openness, and not hide those people or organizations doing bad things while hiding under our banner - they detract from our cause just as much (if not more) than those who oppose us outright. I rest my case also.
oaktree EllieGomez
While there are cases where it is more humane to euthanize than prolong life, those cases would not amount to more than 5% of animals that wind up in shelters, never mind the more than 95% that PETA euthanizes. It cannot be left to one person to decide what constitutes a quality of life, to impose a "philosophy" on an animal who is incapable of such abstract concepts and whose first and primary instinct is to live. If animals are to have rights, it has to start with the right to live. For an animal rights organization to justify the taking of lives based on a philospy that is counter to its own purpose is quite frankly absurd and indefensible. It simply doesnt make sense to the rest of us. We do have the right to judge an organization if that judgment is based on its own principles.
oaktree
PETA's excuse for killing them is that they "might" suffer in the future. It's proven that many of the animals killed were very adoptable. PETA advocates euthanasia of feral cat colonies over TNR because something "bad" "might" happen in the future. Let's put your future in their hands and hope you don't get laid off from work. Because then you should be killed because you might suffer if you have to cut back on expenses or end up being out of work for a year. And let's hope you don't get cancer or break a leg because treatment for those things will cause you to suffer and that's more important than what your life could be like afterwards. See how completely crazy that argument is?
oaktree
" But please look beyond this ridiculous brouhaha, possibly far overblown fact-wise, over a few thousand old and ill dogs and cats. There are far more important animal issues"
Spoken like a true pet killing apologist, who has overdosed on the Newkirk Kool-Aid. The fact remains that if YOU, oaktree, were a cat or dog, you'd have a far different opinion about this issue. You know it. I know it.
Do me a favor and take singer Tony Orlando's advice, and wrap a yellow ribbon around your old self, in memory of the tens, maybe hundreds of thousands of pets that your idols in PETA have murdered throughout the years.
P.S. Meow (Long Live Cats)
P.P.S. Woof (Long Live Dogs)
oaktree "A few thousand old and ill dogs and cats"?! Do you listen to yourself? PeTA (love how "e" for "ethics" is lower-case!) kills puppies and kittens and healthy or treatable young adult animals as well. This was revealed to the public when the Great Piggly Wiggly Dumpster Incident of 2005 story broke. PeTA employees deceived people (including a veterinarian and an ACO who gave them his personal dog) by promising to find homes for the animals. The vet gave them a mother cat and her highly adoptable kittens who were in no danger (he just assumed that PeTA had a better system for getting them adopted than he did) and had given them animals for some time prior to that. At the subsequent trial, PeTA's defense was that they did nothing illegal, because the pets they killed were their "property"! they then compounded the already over-the-top hypocrisy by arguing that what they did was not cruelty, but littering! They claim that this was an isolated incident committed by "rogue" employees, but it is not. PETA kills healthy and treatable pets and lies about it. They defend themselves using arguments that they would condemn if someone else were to use them. They are disgusting.
oaktree List the salaries of the top 10 highest paid employees of PETA please.
I got into it with a PETA marketing person on another site. She claimed that PETA is a shelter "of last resort." It would be one thing if an obscure, broke organization someplace claimed it could not provide medical care, or market animals, or whatever. Their excuse is least of all an excuse for THEM. With millions of dollars, they could provide expensive care, house and feed 700 animals easily, and use their publicity machines to find homes.
bsaunders1 I had a "discussion" with a PeTA supporter in the comments of an article I wrote a while back. She used the "shelter of last resort" argument too, but the definition of "shelter" was a moving target. At one point, she described death as a shelter. The effects of brainwashing ain't pretty.
Oh come on. You're playing right into Berman's hands. He's probably already gleefully shared your rant with all his animal-exploiting buddies. Why didn't you contact PETA privately and ask for an explanation? Did you consider that maybe most of the animals they took in were the sick, old, and least likely to be adopted? The ones other groups rejected? Is it possible you went off half-cocked? No, I don't work for PETA or even donate to them, because I choose to support my smaller, local groups. But I am painfully aware that when animal people eat their own, the animal abusers jump for joy.
oaktree
And your point is??? You are woefully misinformed if you think the 98% of animals they take in are the last resort? They are as much a last resort as any outfit, just more so cause they DO have the money to care for them. Hell, a total of what, 2000 animals for an organization with a $32 million dollar budget. I'd say they are HELPING themselves to that money, not using for the benefit of animals.
oaktree oaktree, please do not equate PETA with any other Rescuers, they are far from it, Any organization that uses it's position and influence to obtain funding, grants, tax exempt status and a whole lot more which includes political pull and power all under the guise to distinquish themselves as some compassionate entity that is helping and saving animals only to Kill them. PETA simply has some highly intelligent people who can run a multi-million dollar organization and pat themselves on the back while padding their checkbooks with salaries that rival CEO's of huge mega-corporations. Every Rescue will have to Euthanize an animal now and then due to serious illness however, make no mistake about it, PETA KILLED THESE ANIMALS BECAUSE THEY FEEL THE WORLD IS A BETTER PLACE WITHOUT THEM. This has and always will be their philosphy.
bravheart300 They've never claimed to be a simple rescue group. They are much more. They challenge society's blatant lack of regard for non-humans, and they do it so well that just about everyone in the civilized world knows who PETA is. They've raised awareness of many issues that go far, far beyond rescuing dogs and cats, and that is exactly what has the Bermans of the world so scared. You are playing right into the exploiters' hands when you fall for their tactic of screaming about a few pets. The greater issue, by far, is the billions of farm animals killed for food every year. PETA challenges that cruelty. Which of your local shelters has the guts to do so?
@oaktree If PETA were truly as successful as you claim why are there so many other AR groups out there? Why don't they all join the mighty and infallible PETA instead? How sincere is PETA's claim to defend animals when they put ANY animal down instead of using their millions to care for them? As I commented above - you seem to think the ends justifies the means.
BooWilliboiRoy oaktree Yes, sometimes the ends do justify the means. That is life in the real world.
oaktree You can't effectively "challenge society's blatant lack of regard for non-humans" by killing healthy and treatable pets. The fact that PeTA kills healthy and treatable pets is very revealing of the dry rot in that organization. Please do not attempt to trivialize the needless deaths of thousands of pets at the hands of PeTA by referring to criticism of said killing as "screaming about a few pets." It is tacky. yet revealing, so thanks!
oaktree Then, PETA, should NOT be considered a rescue group at all, they should never market themselves as such (not sure if they do), and lastly, they should NEVER receive animals. Never. They should stick to the farm animals, and fur, etc. They SHOULD donate some of their billions fo dollars to groups that can, and do, rescue, rehab, and rehome!
oaktree And, I DO AGREE that there are worse things than DEATH, but NOT always. That should be the very few that humans have screwed up so bad that they absolutely cannot be rehabbed.
oaktree
PETA cannot effectively challenge the cruelty of factory farming because they lose credibility every time someone finds out their true goals and how they try to hide it from the public.
Trackbacks
Our New Website
We've moved to a new site: Earth in Transition.
You'll find our new posts, along with the Zoe archives, on the new site. We look forward to seeing you there.
[...] Michael Mountain, the guy who founded Best Friends sanctuary, calls these people “Lady Macbeths.” They can’t wash away the blood. Hence the denial: We’re dealing with the Lady Macbeth [...]
[...] supports (like the Democratic Party). Ingrid Newkirk gets a complete pass from him on the fact that PETA kills more than 90 percent of the animals they bring to their premises. (In 2011, they reported the mass slaughter of 97 percent of the [...]
[...] over to Mountain’s blog and read the rest, then ask the usual [...]