Peta

[Crisovar]

I see a lot of stuff on DOL slamming PETA, but Im yet to see any real evidence to support that veiw. The information presented as evidence of PETA being evil is almost always from sources explicitly compiled to discredit PETA or just hearsay. It may be that some members of PETA are evil nutters, but then many organisations have those, and its not really fair to present their veiws as indicative of the organisations philosophy or activities. It may also be that PETA has some extremely disgruntled enemies who go to a lot of effort (such as setting up domains entitled petakillsanimals) to grind their axe.

Its hard to tell whats going on with the sort of information that makes its way onto DOL. :D

Quotes from the PETA bitch herself

Ingrid Newkirk Quotes

“There is no hidden agenda. If anybody wonders about -- what’s this with all these reforms -- you can hear us clearly. Our goal is total animal liberation. [emphasis added]”

— “Animal Rights 2002” convention, Jun 2002

“The bottom line is that people don't have the right to manipulate or to breed dogs and cats... If people want toys, they should buy inanimate objects. If they want companionship, they should seek it with their own kind.”

— Animals, May 1993

“Even if animal tests produced a cure for AIDS, we’d be against it.”

— PETA president and co-founder Ingrid Newkirk, in the September 1989 issue of Vogue, Sep 1989

“There’s no rational basis for saying that a human being has special rights. A rat is a pig is a dog is a boy. They’re all animals.”

— Washingtonian magazine, Aug 1986

“We’re looking for good lawsuits that will establish the interests of animals as a legitimate area of concern in law.”

— Insight on the News, Jul 2000

“I am not a morose person, but I would rather not be here. I don’t have any reverence for life, only for the entities themselves. I would rather see a blank space where I am. This will sound like fruitcake stuff again but at least I wouldn’t be harming anything.”

— The Washington Post, Nov 1983

“We are complete press sluts.”

— Ingrid Newkirk, in The New Yorker, Apr 2003

“I wish we all would get up and go into the labs and take the animals out or burn them down.”

— "National Animal Rights Convention", Jun 1997

“I openly hope that it [hoof-and-mouth disease] comes here. It will bring economic harm only for those who profit from giving people heart attacks and giving animals a concentration camp-like existence. It would be good for animals, good for human health and good for the environment.”

— ABC News interview, Apr 2001

“Six million people died in concentration camps, but six billion broiler chickens will die this year in slaughterhouses. [emphasis added]”

— The Washington Post, Nov 1983

“Probably everything we do is a publicity stunt ... we are not here to gather members, to please, to placate, to make friends. We're here to hold the radical line.”

— USA Today, Sep 1991

“In the end, I think it would be lovely if we stopped this whole notion of pets altogether.”

— Newsday, Feb 1988

“One day, we would like an end to pet shops and the breeding of animals. [Dogs] would pursue their natural lives in the wild ... they would have full lives, not wasting at home for someone to come home in the evening and pet them and then sit there and watch TV.”

— The Chicago Daily Herald, Mar 1990

“Would I rather the research lab that tests animals is reduced to a bunch of cinders? Yes.”

— New York Daily News, Dec 1997

“More power to SHAC if they can get someone’s attention.”

— People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals president & co-founder Ingrid Newkirk, in The Boston Herald, August 25, 2002

“I will be the last person to condemn ALF [the Animal Liberation Front].”

— The New York Daily News, Dec 1997

“I don’t use the word 'pet.' I think it’s speciesist language. I prefer 'companion animal.' For one thing, we would no longer allow breeding. People could not create different breeds. There would be no pet shops. If people had companion animals in their homes, those animals would have to be refugees from the animal shelters and the streets. You would have a protective relationship with them just as you would with an orphaned child. But as the surplus of cats and dogs (artificially engineered by centuries of forced breeding) declined, eventually companion animals would be phased out, and we would return to a more symbiotic relationship – enjoyment at a distance.”

— The Harper's Forum Book, Jack Hitt, ed., 1989, p.223

“I plan to send my liver somewhere in France, to protest foie gras (liver pate) ... I plan to have handbags made from my skin ... and an umbrella stand made from my seat.”

— PETA President Ingrid Newkirk speaking to onMilwaukee.com, Feb 2005

“Pet ownership is an absolutely abysmal situation brought about by human manipulation.”

— Harper's, Aug 1988

“Perhaps the mere idea of receiving a nasty missive will allow animal researchers to empathize with their victims for the first time in their lousy careers. I find it small wonder that the laboratories aren’t all burning to the ground. If I had more guts, I’d light a match.”

— The Chronicle of Higher Education, Nov 1999

“Humans have grown like a cancer. We're the biggest blight on the face of the earth.”

— Washingtonian magazine, Feb 1990

“Our nonviolent tactics are not as effective. We ask nicely for years and get nothing. Someone makes a threat, and it works.”

— Ingrid Newkirk, in the April 8, 2002 issue of US News & World Report , Apr 2002

“Eating meat is primitive, barbaric, and arrogant.”

— Washington City Paper, Dec 1985

[OSoSwift]

The sooner these morons get wiped out the better. If she would prefer an empty void where she should be I am sure that there are many more than happy to make it happen.

My FIL has hat with PETA on it, underneath........People for the Eating of Tasty Animals.

Bloody idiots. Yes I do not agree with battery hens, pigs and a few other things, but as for no companion animals - she can stick it up her jumper!

[helen]

Peta believe amongst many things that no one should have pets, so if they have their way you will never have another dog, cat etc etc as a pet. They plan to do this by having every pet animal de-sexed

Here are a couple of websites I found on a google search

http://www.petakillsanimals.com/article_de...cfm?article=134

http://www.targetofopportunity.com/index.html

And a new news article http://www.petakillsanimals.com/

do a search on dogzonline for Peta and you will find out more about them too

Or to form a more balanced perspective try the PETA website. You'll find quotes such as "There's no such thing as a responsible breeder." Meaning, rescue, don't buy from a breeder.

Is that what PETA says, or what you say?

Read all about it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PETA

[Jed]

I don't get it. PETA says it themselves, they say it in print, they say it at rallies, they say it in interviews, they say it at every opportunity yet no one believes it :cool:

PETA'S STATED AIM IS TO STOP PEOPLE HAVING PETS. That has been their stated aim for at least 20 years, they have made great progress in that time, yet people still don't believe it.

[Are You Serious Jo]

I especially don't get that people come onto a purebred dog forum and show support for an organisation that wants to rid the world of dogs. I can't imagine either what is going through people's minds when they are reading the posts where it is shown PETA want to eliminate pets, then they go on to say this isn't what PETA wants.

On one hand some people say PETA is important because people listen to them, but on the other hand they want us to believe that when it comes to their pet ownership campaigns people won't listen to them. So to the people that think they aren't capable of having any impact on pet ownership, do they have any influence or not?

[whippets]

PETA isn't an animal activist society.

PETA are terrorists.

P.S. I'm still waiting for them to drink the "special kool aid" first.

P.S.S There is a name for Ingrid. It's called Paranoid Delusional Schizophrenia

Edited March 12, 2010 by whippets

[poodlemum]

I see a lot of stuff on DOL slamming PETA, but Im yet to see any real evidence to support that veiw. The information presented as evidence of PETA being evil is almost always from sources explicitly compiled to discredit PETA or just hearsay. It may be that some members of PETA are evil nutters, but then many organisations have those, and its not really fair to present their veiws as indicative of the organisations philosophy or activities. It may also be that PETA has some extremely disgruntled enemies who go to a lot of effort (such as setting up domains entitled petakillsanimals) to grind their axe.

Its hard to tell whats going on with the sort of information that makes its way onto DOL. :cool:

In reply to you, I quote jdavis' well-put post:

I especially don't get that people come onto a purebred dog forum and show support for an organisation that wants to rid the world of dogs. I can't imagine either what is going through people's minds when they are reading the posts where it is shown PETA want to eliminate pets, then they go on to say this isn't what PETA wants.

On one hand some people say PETA is important because people listen to them, but on the other hand they want us to believe that when it comes to their pet ownership campaigns people won't listen to them. So to the people that think they aren't capable of having any impact on pet ownership, do they have any influence or not?

KKDD -If you are goin to support PETA, perhaps you should re-think your membership of a puerbred dog forum. I know many members here are people who merely own & love dogs, be they purebred or "mutts", but many of us are people who breed and/or show dogs, PAY to belong to DOL and find comments such as yours extremely offensive.

Edited March 12, 2010 by poodlemum

[raz]

Something to ponder. Maybe showies need friends in bikie gangs to tag along to shows as their cheer squads.

[WreckitWhippet]

Nahh it's alright Razzle, my dogs can smell a peta freak a mile off LOL

[raz]

Yes those genetically modified soy bean products can be noticed from a mile off Warls Edited March 12, 2010 by raz

[OSoSwift]

I also don't understand how people can think they are for the benefit of pets or dogs in particular.

You would have to be living under a rock to not know that these idiots are exactly that.

Oh and I do agree they are terrorists not animal activists. I cannot condone the death, destruction and violence they use and are proud to say they use, to get a message across.

[KKDD]

I see a lot of stuff on DOL slamming PETA, but Im yet to see any real evidence to support that veiw. The information presented as evidence of PETA being evil is almost always from sources explicitly compiled to discredit PETA or just hearsay. It may be that some members of PETA are evil nutters, but then many organisations have those, and its not really fair to present their veiws as indicative of the organisations philosophy or activities. It may also be that PETA has some extremely disgruntled enemies who go to a lot of effort (such as setting up domains entitled petakillsanimals) to grind their axe.

Its hard to tell whats going on with the sort of information that makes its way onto DOL.

In reply to you, I quote jdavis' well-put post:

I especially don't get that people come onto a purebred dog forum and show support for an organisation that wants to rid the world of dogs. I can't imagine either what is going through people's minds when they are reading the posts where it is shown PETA want to eliminate pets, then they go on to say this isn't what PETA wants.

On one hand some people say PETA is important because people listen to them, but on the other hand they want us to believe that when it comes to their pet ownership campaigns people won't listen to them. So to the people that think they aren't capable of having any impact on pet ownership, do they have any influence or not?

KKDD -If you are goin to support PETA, perhaps you should re-think your membership of a puerbred dog forum. I know many members here are people who merely own & love dogs, be they purebred or "mutts", but many of us are people who breed and/or show dogs, PAY to belong to DOL and find comments such as yours extremely offensive.

Speaking of extremists who go off half-cocked...

Im not sure where I have stated support for PETA, I smply commented that Iv not seen any evidence to support the extreme anti-PETA position of many DOLers which is quite often expressed in (ironically) violent terms. The thread started with a post about PETA poisoning dog's water, with no factual material to back it up. Other claims Iv read on DOL about what PETA does or wants to do, appear to be long and apocalyptic assumptions drawn selectively from published material, although I agree there is some stuff they appear to advocate that most of us would disagree with. But the material that has been posted in reponse to my post doesnt justify the extremeness of veiws and statements I see expressed on DOL.

And now its being suggested that I should leave DOL? You crack me up.

[sandgrubber]

Back to the rumor about poisoning dogs at a dog show. Has anyone seen validation of that? It seems to me that such events, if they happen, should be made very public. I think they would turn off a lot of PETA's glammer supporters. I'm not bothered much that PETA comes out in support of animal libbers who are 'freeing' laboratory animals, or that they think we should have companion animals, not pets. I believe in free speech. But poisoning dogs in the name of 'ethical treatment of animals' is unacceptable.

Edited March 13, 2010 by sandgrubber

[Kirty]

KKDD, I was just looking at their website and if you follow a few links you get to their page about breeders. They openly state that they do not support people breeding animals at all.

[Crisovar]

I see a lot of stuff on DOL slamming PETA, but Im yet to see any real evidence to support that veiw. The information presented as evidence of PETA being evil is almost always from sources explicitly compiled to discredit PETA or just hearsay. It may be that some members of PETA are evil nutters, but then many organisations have those, and its not really fair to present their veiws as indicative of the organisations philosophy or activities. It may also be that PETA has some extremely disgruntled enemies who go to a lot of effort (such as setting up domains entitled petakillsanimals) to grind their axe.

Its hard to tell whats going on with the sort of information that makes its way onto DOL.

In reply to you, I quote jdavis' well-put post:

I especially don't get that people come onto a purebred dog forum and show support for an organisation that wants to rid the world of dogs. I can't imagine either what is going through people's minds when they are reading the posts where it is shown PETA want to eliminate pets, then they go on to say this isn't what PETA wants.

On one hand some people say PETA is important because people listen to them, but on the other hand they want us to believe that when it comes to their pet ownership campaigns people won't listen to them. So to the people that think they aren't capable of having any impact on pet ownership, do they have any influence or not?

KKDD -If you are goin to support PETA, perhaps you should re-think your membership of a puerbred dog forum. I know many members here are people who merely own & love dogs, be they purebred or "mutts", but many of us are people who breed and/or show dogs, PAY to belong to DOL and find comments such as yours extremely offensive.

Speaking of extremists who go off half-cocked...

Im not sure where I have stated support for PETA, I smply commented that Iv not seen any evidence to support the extreme anti-PETA position of many DOLers which is quite often expressed in (ironically) violent terms. The thread started with a post about PETA poisoning dog's water, with no factual material to back it up. Other claims Iv read on DOL about what PETA does or wants to do, appear to be long and apocalyptic assumptions drawn selectively from published material, although I agree there is some stuff they appear to advocate that most of us would disagree with. But the material that has been posted in reponse to my post doesnt justify the extremeness of veiws and statements I see expressed on DOL.

And now its being suggested that I should leave DOL? You crack me up.

:D

[Are You Serious Jo]

I see a lot of stuff on DOL slamming PETA, but Im yet to see any real evidence to support that veiw. The information presented as evidence of PETA being evil is almost always from sources explicitly compiled to discredit PETA or just hearsay. It may be that some members of PETA are evil nutters, but then many organisations have those, and its not really fair to present their veiws as indicative of the organisations philosophy or activities. It may also be that PETA has some extremely disgruntled enemies who go to a lot of effort (such as setting up domains entitled petakillsanimals) to grind their axe.

Its hard to tell whats going on with the sort of information that makes its way onto DOL.

In reply to you, I quote jdavis' well-put post:

I especially don't get that people come onto a purebred dog forum and show support for an organisation that wants to rid the world of dogs. I can't imagine either what is going through people's minds when they are reading the posts where it is shown PETA want to eliminate pets, then they go on to say this isn't what PETA wants.

On one hand some people say PETA is important because people listen to them, but on the other hand they want us to believe that when it comes to their pet ownership campaigns people won't listen to them. So to the people that think they aren't capable of having any impact on pet ownership, do they have any influence or not?

KKDD -If you are goin to support PETA, perhaps you should re-think your membership of a puerbred dog forum. I know many members here are people who merely own & love dogs, be they purebred or "mutts", but many of us are people who breed and/or show dogs, PAY to belong to DOL and find comments such as yours extremely offensive.

Speaking of extremists who go off half-cocked...

Out of interest, what has anyone done here that is extremist? Are you saying that people who don't like PETA based on what they themselves have said are going off half cocked? What more evidence can you need about an organisations ideology than their stated beliefs? If they say they want dog breeding to stop, and dog breeders don't support them because of this it makes us extremists?

Dog breeders go then pet dogs go as well. Don't you like dogs?

[Jed]

KKDD

It may also be that PETA has some extremely disgruntled enemies who go to a lot of effort (such as setting up domains entitled petakillsanimals) to grind their axe

PETA was charged in the USA for euthanasing and dumping dogs in industrial bins. They told the owners they would find "good homes" for them. That is not rumour or innuendo, or something from a hostile website, that is fact. Charged and fined.

And no, I'm not finding it for you. But it's out there. It's referred to in the other PETA thread

[mita]

And now its being suggested that I should leave DOL?

Not by me. It's healthy to have other points of view. But it's understandable why Peta's not approved by members of a p/b dog forum.

Peta reduces all issues about companion dogs, to a stated position 'all breeders should stop breeding'. It's like some other organisation saying that every problem facing humankind can be fixed via 'all humans should stop having babies'.

Peta has a fundamentalist ideology about companion dogs which doesn't stand up to reason....or science. So it's not surprising there's anxiety that their activism might include doing something plain silly or harmful.

[sandgrubber]

And now its being suggested that I should leave DOL?

Not by me. It's healthy to have other points of view. But it's understandable why Peta's not approved by members of a p/b dog forum.

Peta reduces all issues about companion dogs, to a stated position 'all breeders should stop breeding'. It's like some other organisation saying that every problem facing humankind can be fixed via 'all humans should stop having babies'.

Peta has a fundamentalist ideology about companion dogs which doesn't stand up to reason....or science. So it's not surprising there's anxiety that their activism might include doing something plain silly or harmful.

sadly, trying to counter extremists/fundamentalists word for word seems to work like pouring water on an oil fire. I will often stick up for the RSPCA. I think PETA are a bunch of nutters. But I think it's best to let nutters do their nutty things without comment . . . they thrive on adversity. Tolerance stops if they really step over the line. If they are poisoning dogs at shows, they have gone into the terrorist realm that offends almost everyone and cannot be defended. If this has been done, it's time to come down on them like a load of bricks.

Edited March 13, 2010 by sandgrubber

[Crisovar]

And now its being suggested that I should leave DOL?

Not by me. It's healthy to have other points of view. But it's understandable why Peta's not approved by members of a p/b dog forum.

Peta reduces all issues about companion dogs, to a stated position 'all breeders should stop breeding'. It's like some other organisation saying that every problem facing humankind can be fixed via 'all humans should stop having babies'.

Peta has a fundamentalist ideology about companion dogs which doesn't stand up to reason....or science. So it's not surprising there's anxiety that their activism might include doing something plain silly or harmful.

sadly, trying to counter extremists/fundamentalists word for word seems to work like pouring water on an oil fire. I will often stick up for the RSPCA. I think PETA are a bunch of nutters. But I think it's best to let nutters do their nutty things without comment . . . they thrive on adversity. Tolerance stops if they really step over the line. If they are poisoning dogs at shows, they have gone into the terrorist realm that offends almost everyone and cannot be defended. If this has been done, it's time to come down on them like a load of bricks.

PETA have stepped over the line many times, not just in relation to dogs, they openly state they will use any means to achieve their goals, they are purely and simply dangerous extremists.