Fish should be protected by PETA?

[luminos]

FYI

http://apnews.excite.com/article/20041116/D86D6N2O0.html

[Fredrick Garvin]

On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 13:23:40 -0800, luminos wrote:

> FYI
>
> http://apnews.excite.com/article/20041116/D86D6N2O0.html


These assholes need a freakin' life....

[Eric Schreiber]

luminos wrote:

> http://apnews.excite.com/article/20041116/D86D6N2O0.html

Pfah. I'm all for treating animals in humane and responsible ways, but
PETA are a bunch of ******s.



--
Eric Schreiber
www.ericschreiber.com

[Toni]

"luminos" > wrote in message
...
> FYI
>
> http://apnews.excite.com/article/20041116/D86D6N2O0.html



This post from another list might help answer the question of the problem
with PETA. It is cross-posted with permission of the author, as you will
see in the body of the post. Another helpful website is:
http://www.animalrights.net/

--------

PETA stands for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, is based in
Washington, DC, and bills itself as an advocate for animal rights, as
distinguished from animal welfare. (Briefly, animal rights presumes all
animals have the same civil rights as humans, whereas animal welfare means
the moral obligation humans have to respect sentient beings.)

>From the beginning, some 20 or 30 years ago, PETA's objective has been
nothing less--make no mistake about it--than total extermination by
attrition of ALL animals on earth, starting particularly with dogs and cats.
The rationale is that man is so cruel to animals, it would be better if no
more animals were born. Therefore, all domestic animals--cats, dogs, farm
animals--should be spayed or altered, and, as far as possible, all wild
animals sterilized with dart guns or food bait or some other sterilization
method.

Yes, PETA objects to puppy mills, that being the least of what the
organization objects to. It also objects to ALL breeding of cats and dogs.
It objects to using animals for medical research, no matter how well those
experimental animals are treated and what enormous benefits to both humans
and animals themselves might result from such research. PETA's president
said in no uncertain terms, the life of one dog was not worth a cure for
AIDS (or cancer, or any other terminal illness).

PETA has,. over the years, brought public attention to such real animal
abuses as poor treatment of laboratory and farm animals, but in doing so, it
has not only used the media to publicize such abuses, but heavily funded
such domestic terrorist groups as the Animal Liberation Front and the North
American Earth Liberation Front, among others, the groups you sometimes read
about who break into research laboratories, trash them, release lab animals
into even worse conditions (in one instance, the ALF released a lab full of
anthrax-infected experimental animals), open crates at dog shows and
release the dogs, throw red paint on people
wearing fur coats--in short, used violence to promote their cause. ( It is
not I who calls such groups terrorist; they have been so classified by the
F.B.I.)

And none of this is really about animal rights or even animal welfare. It is
about cult mentality, the ego power trips of the few PETA leaders
(especially its longtime president, Ingrid Newkirk), and about an excuse to
commit violence. As the Center for Consumer Freedom found, in an
examination of PETA's publically available tax returns, PETA spends less
than one percent of its total $13 million budget actually doing anything to
take care of animals...any animals!!!

Bill Drescher has given us a great website, as follows, from the Center for
Consumer Freedom, which has many good links describing PETA and related
issues. I suggest everyone read it and sign the CCF petition to deny PETA
its tax-exempt status. The I.R.S. is, in fact, investigating PETA's openly
political activities as the basis for denying tax-exempt status.

http://www.consumerfreedom.com/petaPetition.cfm

Then, on the next website, as follows, read PETA's own statement of its no
more breeding philosophy and objectives.

http://www.helpinganimals.com/i-nobirth.html

Help Make America a No-Birth Nation ("No Birth Nation" is the catchphrase
for PETA's campaign to spay/alter all cats and dogs everywhere in the U.S.,
then internationally)

"Spaying and neutering is the most important thing we can do to help dogs
and cats. By preventing animals from being born and subsequently abandoned
or given away to irresponsible people, we prevent animals from being hit by
cars, attacked by other animals or cruel people, stolen by laboratory
dealers, used as "bait" by dogfighters, or simply stuck outside to die of
starvation,
exposure, or neglect. "

"By preventing animals from being born" is the operative phrase; that is the
whole point of PETA's campaign to promote and enable enactment of mandatory
spay and alter laws everywhere in the world.

"Each and every one of us can make a difference. Please, make a pledge right
now to take personal responsibility, not just for neutering your own
companion animals, but also to neuter or spay every unsterilized animal you
encounter. Is there an unneutered cat hanging around the back porch? Does
your neighbor have an unaltered dog chained up in the yard? Is your coworker
giving away a litter of kittens? Provide information on spaying and
neutering and ask animal guardians when they plan to have the surgery done.
Be persistent. If they make excuses, arrange to have the animals altered
yourself.... "

In other words, if your neighbor doesn't cooperate, just kidnap his kitty or
dog and have the kitty or dog altered or spayed yourself, regardless of the
fact that your neighbor's kitty is HIS property! This is right up there
with PETA people letting show dogs out of their cages on the show grounds,
because it is cruel to keep dogs in cages or drag them around in cages to
dog shows.
And the dogs get scared in unfamiliar surroundings, run away, get hit by
cars--there have been a number of such incidents.

"Neuter early! Kittens and puppies can be neutered when they are as young as
8 weeks of age. "

This is such bad medicine that it would be kinder to PTS the kittens and
puppies in the first place.

The next website describes PETA's spay/alter mobile unit that, with one vet,
does 25 spays or alters per day. No hospitalization, no post-op follow-up,
no pretesting to find out if the animal is a bleeder etc. etc. Just grab
anything you see who is not spayed
or altered and do the job. PETA calls it snipping, as if describing a
haircut, and when it comes to the incomplete spay jobs in this kind of
factory-style operation, the bitches can spend the rest of their lives, if
they survive at all, with serious health problems.
The males sometimes do not even survive the "snipping".

http://www.helpinganimals.com/i-nobirth-snip.html


The next website is a sample, mind you, just a sample of all currently
existing laws restricting dog/cat ownership and breeding that PETA proudly
presents (not entirely accurately) on its website. There are so many of
these laws now in existence, the
whole list prints out to 17 pages.

http://www.helpinganimals.com/t-lawspayord.html

The following website of the National Animal Interest Alliance gives
shocking information on so-called animal rights activities, which amount to
nothing less than terrorism. This is the kind of activity PETA supports.

http://www.naiaonline.org/body/articles/archives/arterror.htm

Still another website, as follows, from the National Animal Interest
Alliance, gives many philosophical statements made in public by so-called
animal rights groups or their representatives, including and especially
PETA.

http://www.naiaonline.org/body/articles/archives/animalrightsquote.htm

I thank Bill Drescher for calling the CCF website to our attention and Pat
Reilley for some of these other informative websites. I urge everyone to
read these, sign the CCF petition, and, if it is permitted by this list's
admins, to cross-post to as many dog, cat, horse, or other animal lists as
you know of. At stake here is nothing less than your right and mine to
responsibly own and live with
the dogs or cats (or other animals) of our choice within the parameters of
local law.

Roberta Pliner, New York



--
Toni
http://www.cearbhaill.com/discus.htm

[Billy]

Protected by PETA? What kind of talk is that? They're not some
government program, they're a bunch of whack-jobs who managed to
weasel thier way into tax-exempt status with images of kittens and
baby seals, when all they are is bunch of freaks who like breaking
**** and hurting people.

They've become counterproductive to thier own original goals. IIRC,
the man who founded PETA quit some time ago, and now openly speaks
against PETA and thier activities.

read:
http://www.consumerfreedom.com/article_detail.cfm/article/134

--
-----
Billy
-----
Bush won, and we're all going to die.
-----
"luminos" > wrote in message
...
| FYI
|
| http://apnews.excite.com/article/20041116/D86D6N2O0.html
|
|

[Ray Martini]

Right on! Bunch of terrorists if you ask me.

I treat animals and my personal animal companions (yes fish included) with
deceny and respect because that's what I choose to do. But these freakin
people are a bunch of nut jobs. Just like the "right to life" groups killing
people. Hmmm what's up with that man?

Don't worry we all answer to a higher being anyway and it all works itself
out in the end.



"Eric Schreiber" <eric at ericschreiber dot com> wrote in message
...
> luminos wrote:
>
>> http://apnews.excite.com/article/20041116/D86D6N2O0.html
>
> Pfah. I'm all for treating animals in humane and responsible ways, but
> PETA are a bunch of ******s.
>
>
>
> --
> Eric Schreiber
> www.ericschreiber.com

[Billy]

"Toni" > wrote in message
.. .
|
| PETA stands for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, is
based in


People for the Eating of Tasty Animals?

[Vicki S]

PETA has their headquarters right across the river from me in Norfolk,
Va. I am amazed as to how many people donate money to them unknowing
their true motive.

Vicki


"It is well that war is so terrible, else we would grow fond of it."

~ Robert E. Lee~

Visit me on line at
http://shamrock4u.250free.com

To send e-mail delete webtv.net and add msn.com
(put to Vicki in subject line or my spam filter will discard)

[Happy'Cam'per]

"Eric Schreiber" <eric at ericschreiber dot com> wrote in message
news:hpadnaFAl6nL4AfcRVn-
> Pfah. I'm all for treating animals in humane and responsible ways, but
> PETA are a bunch of ******s.

Perhaps a more appropriate name would be PITA ? :-)
--
**So long, and thanks for all the fish!**

[Dances With Ferrets]

I moreless agree with Billy on this one. PETA may have stood for a
good cause at one time, but they have now alienated themselves from
the general population through their abusive methods of distributing
their message. Thus having emasculated themselves of any sort of
useful influence, this is why I do not support them any more. I and
many others would much rather donate our time and money to a local
humane society instead.

"Billy" > wrote in message >...
> Protected by PETA? What kind of talk is that? They're not some
> government program, they're a bunch of whack-jobs who managed to
> weasel thier way into tax-exempt status with images of kittens and
> baby seals, when all they are is bunch of freaks who like breaking
> **** and hurting people.
>
> They've become counterproductive to thier own original goals. IIRC,
> the man who founded PETA quit some time ago, and now openly speaks
> against PETA and thier activities.
>
> read:
> http://www.consumerfreedom.com/article_detail.cfm/article/134
>
> --
> -----
> Billy
> -----
> Bush won, and we're all going to die.
> -----
> "luminos" > wrote in message
> ...
> | FYI
> |
> | http://apnews.excite.com/article/20041116/D86D6N2O0.html
> |
> |

[Papa Red]

I feel the very same way about Grits!<LOL> Pax Vobiscum,...~Dean.

[Ross Vandegrift]

On 2004-11-16, Toni > wrote:
> This post from another list might help answer the question of the problem
> with PETA. It is cross-posted with permission of the author, as you will
> see in the body of the post. Another helpful website is:
> http://www.animalrights.net/

Try www.peta.org and read for yourself what the group is about. This
kind of tripe just makes the war worse. I can admit that PETA is
radical, but their primary function is as an *educational* and
*informational* organization.

I'm a vegetarian. I don't eat meat. I don't want to wear meat. I
don't want to buy shampoo that was inhumanely tested on an animals.
Where can I easily find the information about what products are safe
from animal testing? Where can I find a community of other non-meat
consumers? PETA.

I disagree with their distinction between fish and other animals as
companions. I disagree with euthanizing homeless animals. But the fact
is that they are a primary factual resource. I don't have the time or
money to survey testing practices at corporations. They do. I
appreciate that work.

I feel kind of lame responding to some of the points in such an
inflammatory and misrepresenting article (how many times did the word
"terrorist" appear? I didn't count, but I winced each time...)
but I'd like to reiterate the point about consumer education.

>>From the beginning, some 20 or 30 years ago, PETA's objective has been
> nothing less--make no mistake about it--than total extermination by
> attrition of ALL animals on earth, starting particularly with dogs and cats.
> The rationale is that man is so cruel to animals, it would be better if no
> more animals were born. Therefore, all domestic animals--cats, dogs, farm
> animals--should be spayed or altered, and, as far as possible, all wild
> animals sterilized with dart guns or food bait or some other sterilization
> method.

I know you're not the original author, but please note there is no
citation for this. PETA advocates helping the problem of overpopulation
of abandoned pets by sterilization and euthanasia. I have never heard
PETA claim anything of this sort. To do so would be ridiculous.

> Yes, PETA objects to puppy mills, that being the least of what the
> organization objects to. It also objects to ALL breeding of cats and dogs.
> It objects to using animals for medical research, no matter how well those
> experimental animals are treated and what enormous benefits to both humans
> and animals themselves might result from such research. PETA's president
> said in no uncertain terms, the life of one dog was not worth a cure for
> AIDS (or cancer, or any other terminal illness).

Some writers have argued that if we accept the death of some small
number of animals for the cure to a disease, shouldn't we also accept
the death of some small number of humans? I'm not saying I endorse that
kind of thinking, but I wish people wouldn't talk as if the problem has
such an obvious solution. Do the needs of the many outweigh the needs
of the few? To what degree? Where do we draw the line? Wake up
people: these aren't really simple questions.

> And none of this is really about animal rights or even animal welfare. It is
> about cult mentality, the ego power trips of the few PETA leaders
> (especially its longtime president, Ingrid Newkirk), and about an excuse to
> commit violence. As the Center for Consumer Freedom found, in an
> examination of PETA's publically available tax returns, PETA spends less
> than one percent of its total $13 million budget actually doing anything to
> take care of animals...any animals!!!

Like I said - they are an *EDUCATIONAL* organization. Their money helps
people who care have the knowledge they need to be smart about not
supporting animal cruelty. By having that knowledge, I can have real
economic impact on companies that refuse to have some respect for the
lives of animals.

--
Ross Vandegrift


"The good Christian should beware of mathematicians, and all those who
make empty prophecies. The danger already exists that the mathematicians
have made a covenant with the devil to darken the spirit and to confine
man in the bonds of Hell."
--St. Augustine, De Genesi ad Litteram, Book II, xviii, 37

[Ray Martini]

We also support our local SPCA. There's only so much you can do. We are also
involoved in EPONA (Equine Protection of North America). Talk about a waste
of precious life. Check out the site. We have two babies of our own and
another three that our friends have adopted. You do the best you can and
make a small difference in your little world. If everyone does a small thing
it adds up to something big. Something bigger than a disruptive sometimes
violent PETA could ever achieve.

http://www.eponarescue.org

Now back to fish talk! ;=)

--
Happy Fishin' ...
Ray

"Dances With Ferrets" > wrote in message
om...
>I moreless agree with Billy on this one. PETA may have stood for a
> good cause at one time, but they have now alienated themselves from
> the general population through their abusive methods of distributing
> their message. Thus having emasculated themselves of any sort of
> useful influence, this is why I do not support them any more. I and
> many others would much rather donate our time and money to a local
> humane society instead.
>
> "Billy" > wrote in message
> >...
>> Protected by PETA? What kind of talk is that? They're not some
>> government program, they're a bunch of whack-jobs who managed to
>> weasel thier way into tax-exempt status with images of kittens and
>> baby seals, when all they are is bunch of freaks who like breaking
>> **** and hurting people.
>>
>> They've become counterproductive to thier own original goals. IIRC,
>> the man who founded PETA quit some time ago, and now openly speaks
>> against PETA and thier activities.
>>
>> read:
>> http://www.consumerfreedom.com/article_detail.cfm/article/134
>>
>> --
>> -----
>> Billy
>> -----
>> Bush won, and we're all going to die.
>> -----
>> "luminos" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> | FYI
>> |
>> | http://apnews.excite.com/article/20041116/D86D6N2O0.html
>> |
>> |

[CanadianCray]

Educating by saying most fish are as smart as dogs or cats??? LOL too funny.
I can educate like that. 1 + 1 = 43. Everybody that is new math & you must
all follow it.


"Ross Vandegrift" > wrote in message
...
> On 2004-11-16, Toni > wrote:
>> This post from another list might help answer the question of the problem
>> with PETA. It is cross-posted with permission of the author, as you will
>> see in the body of the post. Another helpful website is:
>> http://www.animalrights.net/
>
> Try www.peta.org and read for yourself what the group is about. This
> kind of tripe just makes the war worse. I can admit that PETA is
> radical, but their primary function is as an *educational* and
> *informational* organization.
>
> I'm a vegetarian. I don't eat meat. I don't want to wear meat. I
> don't want to buy shampoo that was inhumanely tested on an animals.
> Where can I easily find the information about what products are safe
> from animal testing? Where can I find a community of other non-meat
> consumers? PETA.
>
> I disagree with their distinction between fish and other animals as
> companions. I disagree with euthanizing homeless animals. But the fact
> is that they are a primary factual resource. I don't have the time or
> money to survey testing practices at corporations. They do. I
> appreciate that work.
>
> I feel kind of lame responding to some of the points in such an
> inflammatory and misrepresenting article (how many times did the word
> "terrorist" appear? I didn't count, but I winced each time...)
> but I'd like to reiterate the point about consumer education.
>
>>>From the beginning, some 20 or 30 years ago, PETA's objective has been
>> nothing less--make no mistake about it--than total extermination by
>> attrition of ALL animals on earth, starting particularly with dogs and
>> cats.
>> The rationale is that man is so cruel to animals, it would be better if
>> no
>> more animals were born. Therefore, all domestic animals--cats, dogs,
>> farm
>> animals--should be spayed or altered, and, as far as possible, all wild
>> animals sterilized with dart guns or food bait or some other
>> sterilization
>> method.
>
> I know you're not the original author, but please note there is no
> citation for this. PETA advocates helping the problem of overpopulation
> of abandoned pets by sterilization and euthanasia. I have never heard
> PETA claim anything of this sort. To do so would be ridiculous.
>
>> Yes, PETA objects to puppy mills, that being the least of what the
>> organization objects to. It also objects to ALL breeding of cats and
>> dogs.
>> It objects to using animals for medical research, no matter how well
>> those
>> experimental animals are treated and what enormous benefits to both
>> humans
>> and animals themselves might result from such research. PETA's president
>> said in no uncertain terms, the life of one dog was not worth a cure for
>> AIDS (or cancer, or any other terminal illness).
>
> Some writers have argued that if we accept the death of some small
> number of animals for the cure to a disease, shouldn't we also accept
> the death of some small number of humans? I'm not saying I endorse that
> kind of thinking, but I wish people wouldn't talk as if the problem has
> such an obvious solution. Do the needs of the many outweigh the needs
> of the few? To what degree? Where do we draw the line? Wake up
> people: these aren't really simple questions.
>
>> And none of this is really about animal rights or even animal welfare. It
>> is
>> about cult mentality, the ego power trips of the few PETA leaders
>> (especially its longtime president, Ingrid Newkirk), and about an excuse
>> to
>> commit violence. As the Center for Consumer Freedom found, in an
>> examination of PETA's publically available tax returns, PETA spends less
>> than one percent of its total $13 million budget actually doing anything
>> to
>> take care of animals...any animals!!!
>
> Like I said - they are an *EDUCATIONAL* organization. Their money helps
> people who care have the knowledge they need to be smart about not
> supporting animal cruelty. By having that knowledge, I can have real
> economic impact on companies that refuse to have some respect for the
> lives of animals.
>
> --
> Ross Vandegrift
>
>
> "The good Christian should beware of mathematicians, and all those who
> make empty prophecies. The danger already exists that the mathematicians
> have made a covenant with the devil to darken the spirit and to confine
> man in the bonds of Hell."
> --St. Augustine, De Genesi ad Litteram, Book II, xviii, 37
>
>

[magus kent]

"Billy" > wrote in news:S5OdnQiyWIsIGgfcRVn-
:

>
>
> "Toni" > wrote in message
> .. .
>|
>| PETA stands for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, is
> based in
>
>
> People for the Eating of Tasty Animals?
>
>

There was a web site also called "PETA". It stood for "People Eating Tasty
Animals". PETA had them closed down if I recall correctly..m

[Vicki S]

PETA = People Embarrassing the Tidewater Area

Vicki


"It is well that war is so terrible, else we would grow fond of it."

~ Robert E. Lee~

Visit me on line at
http://shamrock4u.250free.com

To send e-mail delete webtv.net and add msn.com
(put to Vicki in subject line or my spam filter will discard)

A couple diving pics
http://community.webtv.net/A-SHAMROCK4U/DIVING

[Tedd Jacobs]

"Vicki S" wrote...
> PETA = People Embarrassing the Tidewater Area

pilologus, et tu Aristotle?

[Kay]

This is not the type of cult that you can agree with just some of their
points, the agreeable points is what pulls people in. Especially if they
make it easy for you by listing what products you should or should not
use. Basically you like them cause they make it easy for you to shop,
while quietly accepting the rest of their cultist beliefs. Because they
pander to your "concerns". There are lots of Vegan sites and information
out there that does not include going to a peta driven site. I will not
list them for you just type vegan in Google.

Have you ever heard of International Vegetarian Union? They have a site
also.

Kay

Ross Vandegrift wrote:
> On 2004-11-16, Toni > wrote:
>
>>This post from another list might help answer the question of the problem
>>with PETA. It is cross-posted with permission of the author, as you will
>>see in the body of the post. Another helpful website is:
>>http://www.animalrights.net/
>
>
> Try www.peta.org and read for yourself what the group is about. This
> kind of tripe just makes the war worse. I can admit that PETA is
> radical, but their primary function is as an *educational* and
> *informational* organization.
>
> I'm a vegetarian. I don't eat meat. I don't want to wear meat. I
> don't want to buy shampoo that was inhumanely tested on an animals.
> Where can I easily find the information about what products are safe
> from animal testing? Where can I find a community of other non-meat
> consumers? PETA.
>
> I disagree with their distinction between fish and other animals as
> companions. I disagree with euthanizing homeless animals. But the fact
> is that they are a primary factual resource. I don't have the time or
> money to survey testing practices at corporations. They do. I
> appreciate that work.
>
> I feel kind of lame responding to some of the points in such an
> inflammatory and misrepresenting article (how many times did the word
> "terrorist" appear? I didn't count, but I winced each time...)
> but I'd like to reiterate the point about consumer education.
>
>
>>>From the beginning, some 20 or 30 years ago, PETA's objective has been
>>nothing less--make no mistake about it--than total extermination by
>>attrition of ALL animals on earth, starting particularly with dogs and cats.
>>The rationale is that man is so cruel to animals, it would be better if no
>>more animals were born. Therefore, all domestic animals--cats, dogs, farm
>>animals--should be spayed or altered, and, as far as possible, all wild
>>animals sterilized with dart guns or food bait or some other sterilization
>>method.
>
>
> I know you're not the original author, but please note there is no
> citation for this. PETA advocates helping the problem of overpopulation
> of abandoned pets by sterilization and euthanasia. I have never heard
> PETA claim anything of this sort. To do so would be ridiculous.
>
>
>>Yes, PETA objects to puppy mills, that being the least of what the
>>organization objects to. It also objects to ALL breeding of cats and dogs.
>>It objects to using animals for medical research, no matter how well those
>>experimental animals are treated and what enormous benefits to both humans
>>and animals themselves might result from such research. PETA's president
>>said in no uncertain terms, the life of one dog was not worth a cure for
>>AIDS (or cancer, or any other terminal illness).
>
>
> Some writers have argued that if we accept the death of some small
> number of animals for the cure to a disease, shouldn't we also accept
> the death of some small number of humans? I'm not saying I endorse that
> kind of thinking, but I wish people wouldn't talk as if the problem has
> such an obvious solution. Do the needs of the many outweigh the needs
> of the few? To what degree? Where do we draw the line? Wake up
> people: these aren't really simple questions.
>
>
>>And none of this is really about animal rights or even animal welfare. It is
>>about cult mentality, the ego power trips of the few PETA leaders
>>(especially its longtime president, Ingrid Newkirk), and about an excuse to
>>commit violence. As the Center for Consumer Freedom found, in an
>>examination of PETA's publically available tax returns, PETA spends less
>>than one percent of its total $13 million budget actually doing anything to
>>take care of animals...any animals!!!
>
>
> Like I said - they are an *EDUCATIONAL* organization. Their money helps
> people who care have the knowledge they need to be smart about not
> supporting animal cruelty. By having that knowledge, I can have real
> economic impact on companies that refuse to have some respect for the
> lives of animals.
>

[Eric Schreiber]

Ross Vandegrift wrote:

> Try www.peta.org and read for yourself what the group is about.

Critical thinking time: do you honestly think that PETA would publish
any information that reflects poorly on them on their own website? As
with any organization promoting an agenda, their site shows only that
which they want to present to the public.


--
Eric Schreiber
www.ericschreiber.com

[Fredrick Garvin]

On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 18:07:45 +0000, Kay wrote:

> This is not the type of cult that you can agree with just some of their
> points, the agreeable points is what pulls people in. Especially if they
> make it easy for you by listing what products you should or should not
> use. Basically you like them cause they make it easy for you to shop,
> while quietly accepting the rest of their cultist beliefs. Because they
> pander to your "concerns". There are lots of Vegan sites and information
> out there that does not include going to a peta driven site. I will not
> list them for you just type vegan in Google.
>
> Have you ever heard of International Vegetarian Union? They have a site
> also.
>
> Kay


Well, that's 2 idiot groups...any more?

[Ross Vandegrift]

On 2004-11-18, Eric Schreiber <> wrote:
> Ross Vandegrift wrote:
>> Try www.peta.org and read for yourself what the group is about.
>
> Critical thinking time: do you honestly think that PETA would publish
> any information that reflects poorly on them on their own website? As
> with any organization promoting an agenda, their site shows only that
> which they want to present to the public.

Of course you're correct to be skeptical. Unfortunately, whenever PETA
comes up, people start throwing accusations about how they're really a
cult whose primary interest is actually the murder of all animals, and
other ridiculous things. But of course no one will provide
substantiating sources. So the only substantial source is what the
organization actually itself says.

So Occam's Razor rules. The simplest explanation is the one without
conspiracy theories or unsubstantiated accusations.

--
Ross Vandegrift


"The good Christian should beware of mathematicians, and all those who
make empty prophecies. The danger already exists that the mathematicians
have made a covenant with the devil to darken the spirit and to confine
man in the bonds of Hell."
--St. Augustine, De Genesi ad Litteram, Book II, xviii, 37

[Eric Schreiber]

Ross Vandegrift wrote:

> Of course you're correct to be skeptical. Unfortunately, whenever
> PETA comes up, people start throwing accusations about how they're
> really a cult whose primary interest is actually the murder of all
> animals, and other ridiculous things.

Truly reliable information about such hot-button topics is usually hard
to find. Signal to noise ratio gets pretty mucked up.


--
Eric Schreiber
www.ericschreiber.com

[Tedd Jacobs]

"Ross Vandegrift" wrote...
> On 2004-11-18, Eric Schreiber <> wrote:
>> Ross Vandegrift wrote:


> So Occam's Razor rules. The simplest explanation is the one without
> conspiracy theories or unsubstantiated accusations.

how parsimonious of you. that razor however, has slit it's own fair share
of throats as i am sure you are aware. try Hanlon's Razor.

[Billy]

"Ross Vandegrift" > wrote in message
...
.. But of course no one will provide
| substantiating sources. So the only substantial source is what the
| organization actually itself says.


Watch the news. Almost every week, I see another PETA sponsored
demonstration with people cavorting naked in the park terrorizing
joggers to protest fur, or a PETA-connected group trying to sink a
fishing boat, or a PETA member arrested for vandalizing a college
classroom where mice are studied....

I understand some people's need to play devil's advocate, but you're
fighting a losing battle with those PETA folks. Like I said, watch
the news, go downtown in a big city once in a while. They
substantiate the claims all by themselves. Their website isn't likely
to tell you about the thousands of minks they released from a farm
last year, most of that which were not rounded up ended up road kill.
The ones that lived? Biologists say that the sudden addition of
hundreds of predators into the local ecosystem is going to screw up
the food chain in the area for decades. They won't tell you THAT on
the website.

shrug

billy

[The Drunken Lord]

Hats off to PETA for protecting fish!