The PETA Thread

[TheNoNamedOne]

http://www.usitc.com/images/peta_logo.gif

Ok, here you go. All those who want to talk about PETA either negatively or positively or just want to post some crank pics on PETA, this is the thread for you to get it out of your system on.

You know, like PETA means People Eating Tasty Animals, PETA Kills Animals, PETA yadayadayadayada.

I may even post for PETA against your negative comments here.

Enjoy!

[A'Sharad]

Ohhh here we go.... People Eating Tasty Animals!...right that what it stands for??

Seriously though, they have some good intensions but being from Texas raising cattle I really dont get the whole vegan thing.

[ukreal1]

I don't support PETA because they want BSL

[TheNoNamedOne]

I don't support PETA because they want BSL

Could you explain a little more on that, ukreal1?

[A'Sharad]

I think they mean Breed specific legislation which I oppose also. An animals specific breed does'nt make them violent. People do that.

[TheNoNamedOne]

I think they mean Breed specific legislation which I oppose also.

Oh, I see now. Thanks C2.

An animals specific breed does'nt make them violent. People do that.

Kinda like guns don't kill people. People kill people. So, no need to ban certain kinds of firearms. I guess the 50cal would be like the Pit Bull of the gun world. We all sure do need the right to be able to lay our hands on some of those.

The logic runs parrallel.

[ststephen65]

so i used to live near VA beach and there is a Peta headquarters nearby right on the bay. well every year the local rock station holds the "anual PETA fishing tourney" shit is funny as hell and every year something ends up happening.

[TheNoNamedOne]

so i used to live near VA beach and there is a Peta headquarters nearby right on the bay. well every year the local rock station holds the "anual PETA fishing tourney" shit is funny as hell and every year something ends up happening.

Yeah, like what?

Some examples?

[ststephen65]

just arguments, also peta usually would show up protesting, nothing serious

[TheNoNamedOne]

just arguments, also peta usually would show up protesting, nothing serious

Oh, I see.

Yes, they know they are going to get free advertisement from just doing so. With a very small advertising budget, Peta has been able to wiggle their way into the awareness of just about every citizen in the U.S., and in many other countries as well, and they do this by going where the cameras and microphones are, or luring them to come to them for free coverage.

Just too hard for Peta to resist going to a covered radio fishing event and pass up the free press their presence is going to get. You have any idea how much a minute ad running on the air would cost?

And you know the old adage, "any press is good press." Particularly when you are a nonprofit org. I guess they are pretty media savy -- seeing their membership has grown to be the largest AR group in the world. Not like they are floundering.

[P_chan]

Or it could be all those donations they get that aren't taxed, they could be getting their money from there. You wonder where the leaders of peta get their paychecks from too.

[TheNoNamedOne]

Or it could be all those donations they get that aren't taxed, they could be getting their money from there. You wonder where the leaders of peta get their paychecks from too.

No need to wonder. You can find all their financial information on their web site.

PETA is one of the most scrutinized (and I think all NPOs are audited quite often -- perhaps yearly) non-profit orgs there is. Big agri corp and pharma corps are always waiting to try and get them shut down. Because of that, they go by the book with their finances.

If they didn't, and there were egregious errors on fund source reportings, they would lose their tax exempt status. Surely they would not want to risk that with an internal policy of financial reporting deception.

Ingrid Newkirk, the President of Peta, earns approx $35,000 as a yearly salary.

Yes, NPO donations are not taxed, such as the Red Cross, Salvation Army, and PETA, are are also not taxed are churches. PETA finds itself in company with many orgs. that are not taxed. Tax laws are written like that to allow for charitable donations and those orgs to grow and give back more to society and those causes they champion.

[socalheart]

What website? The first time I heard about PETA was when Pamela Anderson did something either to them or with them or for them... I didn't pay much attention to it.

[TheNoNamedOne]

What website?

Check it out here, Socal: PETA (http://www.peta.org/)

[TheNoNamedOne]

Information by the numbers from PETA's 2005 financial report (http://www.peta.org/about/numbers.asp):

PETA President Ingrid E. Newkirk earned a modest $35,664 during the fiscal year ending July 31, 2005. By contrast, the average executive director of a public-interest organization made $184,881-more than five times as much.

[DougP]

Isn't Ted Nugent the president of PETA? lol J/K :)

[TheNoNamedOne]

LMAO!

Ted is like the anti-christ of The Movement -- or at least as it concerns hunting.

[P_chan]

YouTube - Bullshit-Peta

I thought this was an interesting video.

[TheNoNamedOne]

Yeah, I have seen that a while ago. Peta liked it, too -- more free advertisement. It sure did not make their membership go down. LMAO!

PETA just keeps on growing the more people feed it -- just like this thread will.

Mark my words. This thread will grow to be one of the largest posted in and most hit. People, whether pro or anti animal protectionist, are drawn to animal topics, and that popularity when in a forum that brings it up to the top for viewing every time someone hits it, just keeps adding to the cycle of growth.

FEED ME! Someone post more here. LOL!

[P_chan]

Someone sure is all high and mighty like they always are.

I'm still going to eat meat, even with crazy asses trying to make me look like bad person.

[TheNoNamedOne]

Didn't say anything about myself above. What are you referring to that does?

Specifically said this thread will grow to one of the largest here, amongst some other things said.

FEED ME! <That's the PETA thread speaking -- not me> <snicker snicker>

[P_chan]

I was stating something about myself and my beliefs. I don't need your permission to do that now do I? I smell the hypocrisy coming. You can state your beliefs but the second I state mine you start to question my agenda.

I know this thread will grow, it's a controversial subject. You act like we didn't know that and your playing us all as fools. Please tell me, where did you take your acting lessons? I want to know how you became so good at playing the victim.

[atb35]

Ingrid Newkirk, the President of Peta, earns approx $35,000 as a yearly salary.

I would be more curious to see where she lives, what she drives, how she spends on a daily basis. Maybe the clothes her kids wear, the places she eats...stuff like that. Im just curious how much the 'benefits' that arent on financial statements add up to.

The President of the United States, the most powerful man (arguably) in the world...only makes $400,000 a year...now that is modest......(sarcasm heavy).

Im not a pet type animal, so PETA can eat my arse.

[Bones]

Hmmm,

atb35 submitted this interesting post:

Quote;

I'm not a pet animal, so Peta can kiss my arse.

I'm a pet animal. Everybody who is reading this thread is a pet animal.

That's a pretty outrageous statement, and I understand that.

I was just curious, if we are not pet animals, why do we get married. Aren't we just a pet for our spouses?

We don't know how to be alone.

Just wondering...

NBTP

[atb35]

Firstly, i had pet type animal, like a dog or cat that is domesticated. Im sure some spouses are or feel as if they are, but not all (at least none with any sac).

And also I said they could eat my arse, because PETA ppl dont have any problem with ppl kissing animals, just cant eat them.

[Fonze]

I'm confused is PETA just against mistreatment of animals or against eating people eating animals.

Also TP what is the biggest and most read about forum topic?

[dk]

I'm confused is PETA just against mistreatment of animals or against eating people eating animals.
http://www.japanupdate.com/forum/showthread.php?t=610

That's the most replied to topic.

http://www.japanupdate.com/forum/showthread.php?t=810

That's the most viewed topic.

Pretty sure the #1 topic will always be something related to sex, boobs, etc.

[ukreal1]

TP, if you knew anything about pitbulls you would realize that they are one of the best people breeds...including with kids...

[ukreal1]

I guess the 50cal would be like the Pit Bull of the gun world. We all sure do need the right to be able to lay our hands on some of those.

The logic runs parrallel.

No the pitbull would be more like the water pistol actually (if we are talking about dog/people relationship)

[DougP]

TP, if you knew anything about pitbulls you would realize that they are one of the best people breeds...including with kids...

Whether they are or not these freak accidents with kids getting chewed up happens alot more than I would like it to. With that said if there's any chance of a dog going nuts around kids especially if there mine I'd rather it be a chiuaua than a pitbull:cool:

[atb35]

there are topics about sex and boobs? Where are they damnit!

[socalheart]

I'm confused is PETA just against mistreatment of animals or against eating people eating animals.

I'm pretty sure that PETA is against eating people. Heh, I just found that one of the more amusing typos. :D

I was wondering about just what PETA was against and for as well. I went to the PETA website. I always thought they were just against the unethical treatment of animals, as the acronym suggests. I didn't realise they were against so many other things too. Geewhiz...

Well, I don't agree with the unethical treatment of animals, but who gets to dictate ethical? For me, it's things like, but not limited to, bashing a cow over the head repeatedly to make steaks or zapping a dog with a cattle prod to get it to obey or giving a hamster to a child as a pet. Why is it unethical for people to eat meat?

[ststephen65]

Oh, I see.

Yes, they know they are going to get free advertisement from just doing so. With a very small advertising budget, Peta has been able to wiggle their way into the awareness of just about every citizen in the U.S., and in many other countries as well, and they do this by going where the cameras and microphones are, or luring them to come to them for free coverage.

Just too hard for Peta to resist going to a covered radio fishing event and pass up the free press their presence is going to get. You have any idea how much a minute ad running on the air would cost?

And you know the old adage, "any press is good press." Particularly when you are a nonprofit org. I guess they are pretty media savy -- seeing their membership has grown to be the largest AR group in the world. Not like they are floundering.


i think you are right but the tournement is really called the anual peta fishing tourney, and it directly in front of their building.

[TheNoNamedOne]

i think you are right but the tournement is really called the anual peta fishing tourney, and it directly in front of their building.

LOL! That is funny.

PETA doesn't mind though. They dish it out and they can take it, and if it means free air time on the radio that is sponsoring it and it goes out to a million people, then fine.

PETA often doesn't care so much that their side's view gets the time on the news. What they do care about is that just the issue gets raised and it gets into the thoughts of people.

Like some people here who have referred to themselves as "Beer Whore, Game Whore, etc..." PETA president Miss Newkirk refers to herself as "Publicity Whore" and that has been working for their small budgett. Says a lot when an org with only $30 million per year can win victories over billion dollar industries and corporations.

I guess there is some truth to David taking on Goliath -- which in today we refer to as the underdog. PETA has been steadily chipping away at the animal industry and more often than not, the battles they enter against them in -- they win, or get the concessions for improvement on animals they wanted.

They are not deluded and know that victory will come in small baby incremental steps.

[TheNoNamedOne]

I would be more curious to see where she lives, what she drives, how she spends on a daily basis. Maybe the clothes her kids wear, the places she eats...stuff like that. Im just curious how much the 'benefits' that arent on financial statements add up to.

I am sure they are all quite modest. Her clothes sure do look so.

Peta has enough people scrutinizing them, and if they found out she were living a life of luxery in mansions and driving high end priced cars, they would have splashed that on the internet for her org's donors to see and question.

She has no kids.

Im not a pet type animal, so PETA can eat my arse.

Your arse is safe from PETA. They are vegens, you know!

[P_chan]

Any large dog is capable of tearing you up if it wants to. My friends corgi was attacked by a lab that almost tore her guts out.

[TheNoNamedOne]

The President of PETA, British born Miss Newkirk, grew up in India with her mother, who worked with and was a volunteer for Mother Theresa. She helped her mother change the bandages of lepers and provided care for the outcasts.

It was there that she said she developed a sense of empathy and concern not only for human suffering, but animal suffering as well, as she also often saw skin and bone animals being forced to carry heavy loads in the street for those merchants prodding them on.

[P_chan]

Only thing I don't get is if she's such a humanitarian why does she condone terrorist acts like arson? Or why did she donate $7,500 dollars to Fran Trutt who tried to murder Leon Hirsch, the CEO of the United States Surgical Corporation?

[TheNoNamedOne]

Only thing I don't get is if she's such a humanitarian why does she condone terrorist acts like arson? Or why did she donate $7,500 dollars to Fran Trutt who tried to murder Leon Hirsch, the CEO of the United States Surgical Corporation?

Give a little more info with some quotes on those and some sources of those quotes, please, and I will try to explain it so that you can understand it.

Just want to make sure that what you say has happened is accurately being picked and interpreted by you.

[P_chan]

http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,956411,00.html
From source number 30

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PETA#_note-NewkirkBest341
Her quote is from source number 24

What about this nut job?

If we really believe that animals have the same right to be free from pain and suffering at our hands, then of course we're going to be blowing things up and smashing windows. ... I think it's a great way to bring about animal liberation, considering the level of suffering, the atrocities. I think it would be great if all of the fast-food outlets, slaughterhouses, these laboratories, and the banks that fund them, exploded tomorrow. -Bruce Friedrich
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PETA#_note-13
from source number 31

This is another good one:

Not until black demonstrators resorted to violence did the national government work seriously for civil rights legislation ... In 1850 white abolitionists, having given up on peaceful means, began to encourage and engage in actions that disrupted plantation operations and liberated slaves. Was that all wrong? — Ingrid Newkirk [24]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PETA#_note-NewkirkBest341
Source number 24

Comparing the way an animal 'suffers' to slavery is just retarded. Kinda like comparing the holocaust to factory farms.

[TheNoNamedOne]

P_chan, the first link you have above about Mr. Trutt; I didn't see in that article that she had given money to him there. I read the whole article but didn't see it. Are you saying she gave it to him for his defense fund? Perhaps that is what you mean, right? And perhaps it says that in the long wiki article you have used for source material. If you are saying she gave it to him to carry out the attacks, then I would like to see that quote.

If it were for the defense fund there is no problem with that. Everyone is innocent until proven guilty and deserves a trial and lawyer. The U.S. government itself provides lawyers to those who cannot retain them themselves, but that does not make the U.S. government or its taxpayers wrong in any way for doing so.

[atb35]

I have no problem with ppl who are compasionate for animals that are treated badly. A farm animal, or animal that is born with the sole purpose of being eaten is not cruel. Kittens being thrown at cement walls is cruel. Cats that are forced to live with lonely old ladies is cruel.....

The ppl I have a problem with are the demented idiots who think animals are NO DIFFERENT then humans. If they werent, we wouldnt need PETA, they would stand up for themselves! They are ******* animals, they cant talk, write and they dont have reasoning. That is what sets animals apart from humans (and for the smartasses, I understand humans are animals, you know what Im talking about so STFU), they cant reason.

Other people that bother me are the freaks that think their animals are their kids...come on now, be for real/

[ukreal1]

Whether they are or not these freak accidents with kids getting chewed up happens alot more than I would like it to. With that said if there's any chance of a dog going nuts around kids especially if there mine I'd rather it be a chiuaua than a pitbull:cool:


of course Doug P. me too, in fact I would rather my kids be bit by their pet rat than a chiuaha. But thats a different story, my point is that a chiuhuia (or however you spell the name) is much more likely to bite than a pit bull in the first place. Because pitbulls are great with kids if they a family pet. I am not talking the kid of backyard crap where a dog is tethered all day and fed scraps. I am talking about a family dog.

unfortunately, the media has done a great job at twisting the truth. There are some great reputable sites regarding these 'freak' accidents, that demystify the whole thing, one of them being that people call a dog a pit bull even when turns out it was no such thing...

The major thing about dog attacks is that over 90% of bites/maulings are done by INTACT MALES...

blame the deed not the breed...any bloody dog can bite.
heres a game for starters!!!
http://www.pbrc.net/poppysplace/games/AdultFindabull/findpitbull_v4.html

heres another website:
http://www.workingpitbull.com/aboutpits.htm

and a really good one to end with!
http://www.nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/

[TheNoNamedOne]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PETA#_note-NewkirkBest341
Her quote is from source number 24

This quote:
(A)"In general, Newkirk makes no apology for PETA's support of activists who may break the law, (B)writing that "no movement for social change has ever succeeded without 'the militarism component'." (C)Of the Animal Liberation Front, she writes: "Thinkers may prepare revolutions, but bandits must carry them out.""

(a) This is in the context of providing legal defense funds for people who have been accused or arrested for a crime, which could be direct action such as vandalism or civil disobedience. Note, she does not say "we support those who will commit crimes," or that "we want you to do criminal activity", or that "PETA members and supporters are to engage in crime and we will support you in carrying that out." Lots of big differences that you should be aware of.

Why should an org apologize for helping someone obtain the means for a fair defense if they plead not guilty to the crimes they are accused of or if there are mitigating factors involved in it? Unions who supply lawyers for police, firefighters, teachers, etc... do not issue apologies for supporting those they gave councel and representation to. You are not saying there should be a double standard, are you?

(b)That is an observation of history. Is there something incorrect about it? If so, what?

(c) Another truthful observation in terms of revolutions that change the status quo and usher in rights and protections for those oppressed. Once someone goes against the status quo in a way to affect change, they will be labeled as criminals, for as bandits, the status quo will view them as trying to take something away from them which they feel is their privilege or right to keep. Again, what is incorrect about that?

These are all based on simple observations of history.

You can bet, that if her words were legally viewed as support for terrorism and advocating it, PETA (http://www.peta.org/) would lose their tax exempt status and would be under the thumb of the Patriot Act. Being a U.S. citizen not born here in the U.S., but originally a British Citizen, she would have been deported had she directly advocated or supported violent overthrow of the government or its laws through terroristic acts.

Observing history and commenting on that is quite fine, and she has done so honestly.

[P_chan]

P_chan, the first link you have above about Mr. Trutt; I didn't see in that article that she had given money to him there. I read the whole article but didn't see it. Are you saying she gave it to him for his defense fund? Perhaps that is what you mean, right? And perhaps it says that in the long wiki article you have used for source material. If you are saying she gave it to him to carry out the attacks, then I would like to see that quote.

If it were for the defense fund there is no problem with that. Everyone is innocent until proven guilty and deserves a trial and lawyer. The U.S. government itself provides lawyers to those who cannot retain them themselves, but that does not make the U.S. government or its taxpayers wrong in any way for doing so.

It was a dirty tactic if you ask me. She gave her some money and I believe she knew what she was going to do. Thats they reason I hate peta, their tactics are dirty.

[TheNoNamedOne]

It was a dirty tactic if you ask me. She gave her some money and I believe she knew what she was going to do. Thats they reason I hate peta, their tactics are dirty.

P_chan, I think I asked you to clarify if that money was given before the crimes were committed or if it was given for legal fees. How can it be a dirty tactic in knowing what she was going to do beforehand if that money were given to her for attorney fees after the fact?

"I believe" is nothing in terms of what is. Please support your assertion. Or just admit you can't and it is all conjecture on your part. Accusations can be a dime a dozen and not worth anything.

Looking forward to seeing any support you can muster to show that what you believe is fact. Thanks in advance.

[P_chan]

There's a smug alert in this forum

By funding her legal defense and the legal defense of other animal 'liberators' (I use that term very loosely, terrorist is more appropriate), she is supporting them without actually coming out an saying it. It's a dirty tactic to try and keep your hands clean.

What about you TP? Do you support acts of terrorism or violence against people and other organizations? Just because PETA has a huge boner for animals doesn't give them the right to inflict harm on others. Thats hypocrisy at it's finest.

[TheNoNamedOne]

By funding her legal defense and the legal defense of other animal 'liberators' (I use that term very loosely, terrorist is more appropriate), she is supporting them without actually coming out an saying it. It's a dirty tactic to try and keep your hands clean.

Oh, now I see your way of reasoning: If a mother and father pay for the legal fees of their daughter who is accused of murdering someone, they in fact are supporting, not only their legal fees, but much more -- also the act of murder. They are supporting murder as a tactic and keeping their hands clean.

Strange logic. So strange that legal authorities in no way agree with you.

What about you TP? Do you support acts of terrorism or violence against people and other organizations?

If I did, don't you think I would be astute enough to not admit such on a public forum such as this in such a small community as we have here?

No, I do not support unjustified direct action.

By the way, would the Sons of Liberty destroying property by dumping it into the bay be construed as terrorism or violence? How about as they harrassed those loyal to the King making them fear for their safety and damaging their property and injuring them?

Somehow, I keep recalling dk's oft quoted, "One man's terrorist, is another man's freedom fighter."

P_chan, how do you define terrorism?

Just because PETA has a huge boner for animals doesn't give them the right to inflict harm on others. Thats hypocrisy at it's finest.

What terrorist activity or physical harm or property damage, as an org, have they committed? Surely, other than just empty accusations, you have some sources that state PETA as an org has been charged with injuring someone, don't you? Bring them forth.

I will tell you, you won't find any, for if PETA were convicted as such they wuold have lost their standing as a tax exempt org.

You fall short again, P.

[Fonze]

petakillsanimals.com

[TheNoNamedOne]

Oh yeah, Fonze. That site is created by the Center for Consumer Freedom. It is a one man astro turfing job (the illusion of creating a grass roots effort) paid for by big tobacco, ranchers, and the restaurant industry. That is well known in the activist world as the hired hitman group by corporations to go after orgs that target them. Funny, they even attack Mothers Against Drunk Driving.

The CCF has been exposed long ago.

[Fonze]

Yet you fail to disagree with there points f animal dumping.

[TheNoNamedOne]

Yet you fail to disagree with there points f animal dumping.

PETA has always had a euthanasia policy. There are two colors to PETA like there are two colors to a zebra. They are an animal welfare group and an animal rights group.

Virtually every animal welfare group accepts euthanasia for over flowing shelters and animals that are beyond habilitation. They do not hide that part of their org. Euthanasia is listed on their site as a thing they support.

The case you are referring to happened several years ago. Sherrifs of that county had called PETA in because they came upon a shelter that was using horrible methods to kill their excess animals. That county had like the highest ferrel dog and cat rate in the whole U.S. and the shelters were just unable to cope with the numbers. PETA came in and did help with the euthanasia.

It is clear that PETA made a mistake there in the disposal of those carcases and there were a few other mistakes made at the individual staff level of the PETA field agent. PETA does not deny that and has apologized for some poor judgement in that case.

Were some dead animals dumped improperly? Yes. Is that kind of dumping official PETA policy and mode of operati? No. Mistakes made? Certainly.

Those animals, however, were dead and were killed through humane means -- such as euthanasia injection. Despite the spectacular pics, there was no suffering in their deaths. PETA has already admitted their mistakes there.

However, PETA does not apologize for the realistic situation that is found on shelters and that there is no denying that euthanasia is the humane choice when shelters are just being over run with animals from people abandoning them either at shelters or in rural areas where they become ferel, threaten populaces through rabies or the ecology of the environment.

That is as best I can explain it. PETA surely is not perfect. They have made mistakes, and will likely make mistakes in the future. All large orgs do from time to time in carrying out their policies.

[Fonze]

I'm back TP and moved my questionn here.
You still have not answered the question of the number of your equals u own. Also I would be interested in knowing how much u contribute to animal shelters and volunteer at them, im sure such an animal liberation guy spends time and money on such important social causes.

[TheNoNamedOne]

I'm back TP and moved my questionn here.
You still have not answered the question of the number of your equals u own.

Not sure why you didn't post this in the TheProsecutor thread, but I will answer it here anyway.

I am the legal guardian of 4 dogs -- 3 adopted and one picked up stray. I do not consider them as things I own, but those beings I have legal responsibility for, and that responsibility is recognized by law. Humans also do not own their children -- in case you weren't aware of that or were wondering, or had never thought on the point before.

Also I would be interested in knowing how much u contribute to animal shelters and volunteer at them, im sure such an animal liberation guy spends time and money on such important social causes.

Yes, I do. Volunteering at animal shelters is important work, but that is nont the only work important for animal liberation. Outreach is important, too. I try to get the time to pamphlet to spread that info when I can.

Actually, I am really excited recently because I have just found a place that has a lot of animal rights informational pamphlets in Japanese. If you ever see a foreignor passing out Japanese pamphlets on AR here, then it is probably me.

Sorry, but I will not tell you how much I donate to the cause and to which different groups (besides, you could never verify the amount so it really is a moot point). There are several well known groups I give to, and I frequent their sites to purchase things they have listed, such as books.

Everytime I get a new batch of pamphlets I also make an additional donation. At this point in my life I am fortunate to be able to have the recourses to do so. But, I do wish I could give more to the effort, and will if circumstances make it so.

Ok, if you want to ask some more personal questions, please take that to TheProsecutor thread in the Raves and Rants section.

Remember, this is the PETA thread. Back on topic.

[A'Sharad]

Just found this online while going through the FBI webpage on domestic terrorism. Since this is the PETA thread I thought I would throw it up.

"If we really believe that these animals do have the same right to be free from pain and suffering at our hands, then of course we're going to be, as a movement, blowing stuff up and smashing windows. For the record, I don't do this stuff, but I do advocate it. I think it's a great way to bring about animal liberation, and considering the level of the atrocity and the level of the suffering, I think it would be a great thing if, you know, all of the fast-food outlets, and these slaughterhouses, and these laboratories, and the banks that fund them exploded tomorrow. I think it's perfectly appropriate ... [applause] I think it's perfectly appropriate for people to take bricks and toss them through the windows, and, you know, everything else along the line. Hallelujah to the people who are willing to do it."
( Bruce Friedrich PETA. In an address to the Animal Rights 2001 national convention in McClean, Virginia, July 2001.)

[P_chan]

Just found this online while going through the FBI webpage on domestic terrorism. Since this is the PETA thread I thought I would throw it up.

"If we really believe that these animals do have the same right to be free from pain and suffering at our hands, then of course we're going to be, as a movement, blowing stuff up and smashing windows. For the record, I don't do this stuff, but I do advocate it. I think it's a great way to bring about animal liberation, and considering the level of the atrocity and the level of the suffering, I think it would be a great thing if, you know, all of the fast-food outlets, and these slaughterhouses, and these laboratories, and the banks that fund them exploded tomorrow. I think it's perfectly appropriate ... [applause] I think it's perfectly appropriate for people to take bricks and toss them through the windows, and, you know, everything else along the line. Hallelujah to the people who are willing to do it."
( Bruce Friedrich PETA. In an address to the Animal Rights 2001 national convention in McClean, Virginia, July 2001.)

I think I pointed this same speech out before.

Don't worry, you won't get a response on it. If you do, it will twist the speech to try and make it seem like killing people in the name of animals is ok.

[Fonze]

I also heard a report that said that PETA and the police knew of Vicks doings almost 2yrs ago and did nothing.

I wonder if our local AR might be able to indulge us with some info?

[OCanadaOurHomeAndNativeLand]

I also heard a report that said that PETA and the police knew of Vicks doings almost 2yrs ago and did nothing.

I wonder if our local AR might be able to indulge us with some info?
If PETA knew, they had a duty to report it to the authorities (like the police). If the police knew, they had a duty to act. It'd be nice to see a source for that report...

[TheNoNamedOne]

I don't remember the details of this exactly. Though I did read a very detailed explanation of this about a month ago explaining how all the pieces of this puzzle fell into place little by little over time.

Peta along with the police were getting reports about this almost concurrently at exactly the same time. Vick's name kept popping up in Chicago and in the SouthWest and all throughout the dogfighting world, and an investigation into a murder that the police were conducting that had occurred due to a wager in a dogfight in Texas (if my memory is correct) kept seeing his name appear.

State and federal investigators had been clued into Vick's dog fighting world either before or about the same time PETA and The HSUS were. The man in Texas had a dog that won a $100,000 purse and the loser decided to kill him so that it wouldn't have to be paid. When this man was killed and police began investigating and making arrests connected with that, people in the dog fighting world began dropping names. Vick's name kept coming up.

But, the police had no hard evidence so they couldn't just sweep in all of a sudden. They had to gather evidence. Yes, PETA and The HSUS had gotten tips and were aware of it, but they could not bring it out in the open because they were afraid that if they did Vick would know that an investigation was targeting him and that he would destroy all the evidence.

So, PETA and The HSUS laid low and let the police work its system. At first they thought the State of Virginia would step in more quickly, and indeed they urged them to do so but were ignored. When the State of Virginia refused to move on it, PETA and The HSUS put pressure on Federal Law Enforcement to do so, and that was almost on the heals of after Pres. Bush signing into legislation outlawing dog fighting nationwide listing it as a federal felony with stiffer penalties.

The Feds raided Vick's property on the suspicion that guns or drugs, or one of the person's was in violation of his parole. Of course they suspected the dog activity there but they did not go there for that purpose. When it was confirmed that dogfighting was there they went and got another supeona and then confiscated the dogs and well... you know the rest.

So, it was a rather sticky situation.