Letter from PETA and the rumble in Seattle continues

March 27, 2008

We work very hard to be fair here at the PetConnection. We have our opinions — and are entitled to them, by the First Amendment — but we’re also about the facts and about our readers’ opinions, too. That’s why we not only allow but also encourage comments.

I guess PETA isn’t aware of that, since instead of commenting on my recent post that mentions them, they decided to e-mail, fax and certified mail me a letter. In the interest of fairness, I want to make sure that letter gets read.

In it, Jeffrey S. Kerr, the PETA Foundation’s General Counsel and Vice President of Corporate Affairs, takes issue with my wording indicating that the pets who end up at PETA are looking for new homes. He says the animals who end up at PETA are not adoptable, and that PETA’s 97 percent kill rate in 2006 — as reported to the Commonwealth of Virginia, click here to see — is because PETA is giving these animals a kind way out of this world.

Since the animals in question are no longer alive to be evaluated by independent veterinarians and behaviorists, we’ll have to take Mr. Kerr”s word that:

The animals that you are referencing were not brought to PETA to find new homes. These animals were brought to, or picked up by, PETA because they were unadoptable for a variety of reasons, and had been surrendered precisely because they were not adoptable. Many of these animals were sick, and euthanasia brought them a peaceful release from the suffering that they endured.

Thank you for that clarification, Mr. Kerr.

Here’s the entire letter.

***

Meanwhile, up in the Seattle area, the fight over the King County Animal Control shelter is getting louder and nastier. Don’t miss the comments on Christie’s post yesterday.

Filed under: administration,no-kill,pets, connected — Gina Spadafori @ 12:29 pm

56 Comments »

  1. I guess PETA’s motto is then “Better Dead than Sick”?

    Sick can be made well again. That wouldn’t be convenient, nor would it fit in with PETA’s true, hidden design that so many well-meaning, compassionate people haven’t yet understood.

    So .. what I glean from Mr. Kerr’s letter is that PETA believes if an animal is sick, just kill it. Poof. Sounds like genocide to me.

    And, by the way, how do they feel about all humans that are ill, mentally or physically? Give them all a peaceful release from suffering, as well? Why would that not surprise me.

    Talk about sick.

    Comment by Nadine L. — March 27, 2008 @ 1:04 pm

  2. So let me get this straight: people, groups and/or whoever surrender pets to PETA specifically BECAUSE they are not adoptable? BECAUSE they want them put to death and they know PETA will do it? If this is so, why does PETA call its facility a “shelter” instead of a “slaughterhouse” as I know has been proposed? And (pardon me if I sound like some blathering idiot who thinks that pets might be worth saving) what system is in place for evaluating these pets in advance of them being surrendered to PETA so that PETA is 100% sure they are “unadoptable”? So *entirely and completely sure* that they kill them while in transport from the pickup site to the Piggly Wiggly dumpster.
    You can take PETA’s word for it if you choose, I’m reserving my judgement until more facts are provided. And to support a freaking 97% kill rate, they’d better be some profoundly compelling facts.
    Gina, let me know if you need anything in prison, hee hee. I’ll bake cupcakes!

    Comment by slt — March 27, 2008 @ 1:28 pm

  3. Hmmm…what about all the people who have stated that when they gave their pets to PETA, PETA promised to find them good homes.

    And last time I checked, a vet will humanely euthanize very sick pets.

    Where are the medical evaluations on all the animals they killed, where are the behavioral evaluations? I’m with SLT – PETA should put up or shut up.

    His statement doesn’t even pass the smell test. But something sure stinks at PETA.

    I’ll be happy to share those cupcakes in prison if you liek.

    Comment by 2CatMom — March 27, 2008 @ 1:46 pm

  4. And you want to talk about remedies Mr. Kerr – how about you compensate the owners who apprantly all misunderstood you when they surrendered their pets to you?

    If you open up this pandoras box Mr. Kerr – don’t be suprised is some pet owners don’t decide to counter-sue you for defamation.

    And by the way – you should consult an attorney – absent evidence to the contrary it is not libelous or defamatory to state a conclusion (you killed animals without cause) based on the evidence provided (statements of the former owners). So again, Mr. Kerr, put up of shut the F*** up.

    Make those cupcakes chocolate please! Sprinkles would be a nice touch!

    Comment by 2CatMom — March 27, 2008 @ 1:51 pm

  5. What the heck is in the water in VA that is causing “many” of these thousands of pets killed by PETA to be so sick that they are “suffering” and death is the only answer? How many Veterinarians are involved in the medical evaluation process of these sick pets so that PETA knows with ultimate certainty they are unadoptable? Who are these Vets? I’d like to research their credentials.

    Comment by slt — March 27, 2008 @ 1:54 pm

  6. With all the cash that PETA has, I can’t imagine investing in appropriate veterinary care for the animals in their “shelter” is a financial difficulty. So, assuming there is appropriate veterinary care available, let’s see the case reports from the Veterinarians who evaluated (and I assume attempted to treat) these “unadoptable” pets. There’s no privacy act for the medical records on dead pets. Let’s look at them and see if we can discover what on earth is causing this massive pet sickness in VA from which the only relief is swift death.

    Comment by slt — March 27, 2008 @ 2:08 pm

  7. Oh, that’s rich. I LOL’ed.

    “Many” of these animals were sick? How many? Where are the vet reports? Are they in the Piggly-Wiggly dumpster,too? Who administered the temperament tests, and which methods did PETA use?

    And seriously: how can a group of people who know so little about dogs and dog behavior determine whether a dog is “unadoptable”?

    OK, how’s this: “97% of the pets obtained by PETA in 2006 were killed. PETA refuses — or is unable — to provide documentation indicating how many of those animals were adoptable. Since PETA believes domestic dogs and cats shouldn’t exist in the first place, you can draw your own conclusions.”

    Defections troubling Mr. Kerr, do you think? The foot soldiers wising up and asking questions? I hope so.

    Comment by Luisa — March 27, 2008 @ 2:08 pm

  8. We can’t forget, that in PeTA’s eyes, any domestic animal is ‘suffering’ simply because it is DOMESTICATED and living with humans. In their eyes, that alone is an inhumane state for an animal to exist in. Why bother to rehabilitate to treat an animal, if it’s fate is to go back into a home with humans as a companion animal? In PeTA’s eyes, doing that would be a sin against their cause.

    In PeTA eyes, releasing them from the ‘suffering’ of BEING A PET is a kindness.

    Comment by Pai — March 27, 2008 @ 2:22 pm

  9. Comment by Pai — March 27, 2008 @ 2:22 pm

    I hear you BUT… They said “many” of these thousands of “unadoptable” pets were “sick”. I want to see some evidence to support that. Show us “many” of the 2006 case records identifying the pets, their ages, the symptoms, diagnoses, treatments and durations, and the ultimate conclusion that only death could resolve the pets’ medical conditions.

    I’ve seen pets brought into clinics in rough shape – pets that needed medical care and didn’t get it for one reason or another. I’ve volunteered at free vet clinics for the homeless – these dogs lacked even the most basics most of us think of. But in *nearly* every case, treatment was performed and the pet recovered. It would be a rare case where the pet was so sick, not responding to treatment, etc that they had to be euthanized. But what I know to be a RARE type of case is apparently EPIDEMIC at PETA’s facility. I want to know why.

    Comment by slt — March 27, 2008 @ 2:45 pm

  10. 97% … ninety-seven percent kill rate! An incomprehensible number. Something’s very wrong in River City and I totally agree with all of you on every count. How about devil’s food cupcakes? Hehe.

    I suggest there be a full Congressional Investigation. It’s time there are some answers to all these questions.

    Comment by Nadine L. — March 27, 2008 @ 3:33 pm

  11. I forgot to mention (in my last post where my head was exploding, or at least my typing fingers were) that the TRUTH is an absolute defense to libel.

    And I for one, would love to learn the truth. PETA, bring it on. Let’s go to court so we can subpoena all your records, see where your money goes, interview every person who surrendered an animal, expose your philosophy of ‘letting animals return to the wild,” etc. Just think of the media attention Dr. Becker could bring to this.

    I can see it now: Martha goes ape over PETA. Matt Lauer’s becomes rabid when he hears the truth about PETA. Dan Rather comes back to 60 minutes and does an expose….and this time he’s barking up the right tree!

    Its about time the wider public discovered what you are really about.

    Make those angel food cupcakes with devils food frosting please, LOL!!!

    Comment by 2CatMom — March 27, 2008 @ 3:49 pm

  12. well, as I recall, in the trial of PETA workers who dumped dead dogs in private trashbins, shelter personnel said they understood PETA was taking the animals to find them new homes.

    Far be it from me to suggest this lawyer is, um, well, you know, like LYING.

    Comment by EmilyS — March 27, 2008 @ 3:49 pm

  13. EmilyS, yes in the news articles reporting on the court case, employee’s from a shelter, and I think I remember, a vet’s office report surrendering adoptable puppies to the Peta van, that then euthanized them and dumped them in a supermarket dumpster. Both acts were illegal.

    Comment by compcat — March 27, 2008 @ 4:29 pm

  14. “The Foundation to Support Animal Protection which operates under the brand name “People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (Peta).” So donations to PETA actually go to a lobby group.

    As quoted in TheLawyer.com (full article below), it appears that Ingrid has seven ferocious lawyers in her back pocket who seem bent on projecting an aura of fear. No wonder shes roamed free. Until now.

    And about young Mr. Kerr, who proclaims he wears lawsuits as a badge of honor:

    “Back in the early 1990s, newly qualified lawyer Jeffrey Kerr attended a lecture in the US titled ‘Did your Food have a Face?’” I was actually going to another lecture, but it had been replaced,” explains the general counsel for US-based non-for-profit lobby group Foundation to Support Animal Protection, which operates under the brand name People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (Peta).
    “I just couldn’t turn away from it,” Kerr continues. “I became a vegan shortly after the lecture and about nine months later I joined Peta as an in-house lawyer [from the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation].”

    “As general counsel, Virginia-based Kerr oversees a six-strong legal team…”

    “We have a vegetarian office policy. When you join Peta you receive a vegetarian starter kit,” he says in a rather matter-of-fact manner.”

    “This fearless attitude towards conflict has filtered down to Kerr and his team. ”We’re always looking for opportunities to bring action against exploiters,” says Kerr. “In fact, to an extent we take lawsuits and wear them as a badge of honour.”

    “Peta is widely known (and feared) for its undercover work, with many of these investigations leading to legal action against target companies.”

    “We’re trying to operate in a system under laws designed by politicians and large corporates – these are not animal cruelty-aware individuals,” he says.”

    Perhaps we should find out?

    More: http://www.thelawyer.com/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=128641&d=195&h=24&f=46

    Comment by Nadine L. — March 27, 2008 @ 4:59 pm

  15. I’d like to know how a vet handed them ADOPTABLE kittens and their mother (see quote below). Yet, somewhere from the office to their van–they became unadoptable. Peta kills animals because Ingrid Newkirk believes people should not have pets. Plain and simple.

    (Here is the quote from the vet-“We do call them and request they come in and pick-up these animals and try and find them a good home,” Dr. Proctor said. “This cat and two kittens I gave them last week were in good health and were very adoptable, especially the kittens.”)

    Comment by Kristy — March 27, 2008 @ 5:31 pm

  16. I know that the farther left you go of Center the harder basic economics seems to be, which means that PeTA being so far beyond left field as to be playing on a different continent might absolve them from being able to balance their check book.

    But look at this. For every dog that was adopted from PeTA, they killed 248.

    And they do so at a cost of over $2.5 Million per dog saved, or about $10,000 for each dog they see.

    Sure, killing 97% of the time and saving 3% of the time isn’t the only thing PeTA does with all that money. But I’d say that it’s the most real thing they do. Who cares about costumes and demonstrations? When they play God, they really screw it up royally.

    Not only do the dog’s pay with their lives, but so too do the ignorant supporters of PeTA who fund those $2,5 million dollar rehomed dogs or $10,000 corpses.

    Comment by Christopher — March 27, 2008 @ 6:10 pm

  17. And I’ll huff and I’ll puff and blow your house down!

    I would personally love to see documentation on how 97% of those animals were deemed un-adoptable. Was a vet involved? If not, did PETA employees (once again) make veterinary diagnoses and carry out a veterinary procedure (euthanasia) without a license?

    PETA, methinks you protest too much….

    Comment by JenniferJ — March 27, 2008 @ 6:12 pm

  18. I think we should all write Mr. Kerr and tell to cease and desist being an idiot.

    PeTA = Perverts for the end To Animals

    Comment by cheryl — March 27, 2008 @ 7:10 pm

  19. Here’s a letter about a rescue group who turned over scores of animals to PeTA with the understanding they’d be adopted out:

    http://www.nathanwinograd.com/linked/petalied.pdf

    And I found an Ingrid Newkirk quote where she was talking about the adoptable cat and kittens the two PeTA workers took from the vet and then promptly killed. In her interview with CNN, she basically said that if the VET couldn’t find them homes, then PeTA sure wouldn’t have been able to do so! Essentially, she was condoning the actions of the workers who killed them.

    The whole thing is just so sick and twisted. And sad.

    Comment by The OTHER Pat — March 27, 2008 @ 7:34 pm

  20. Bwaaa haaa haaaa haaaa!

    PeTA’s defense IN COURT for the back-alley killing of adoptable animals they had acquired under false pretenses was that the animals were OWNED by PeTA, and they could do whatever they liked with them.

    Because the testimony from those who witlessly turned the animals over to the PeTA Death Van was clear that the animals were healthy and adoptable, and they’d been assured that PeTA was going to “find them new homes.”

    Seems to me that at normal animal shelters, there’s a special form when someone who can’t afford to euthanize his own pet turns that sick or dangerous animal over to have the shelter do it. This is different from the regular relinquishment paperwork.

    So where are the thousands and thousands of informed consent forms, the ones that prove that pet owners and other shelters sign the animals over to be killed?

    Congratulations Gina! You’ve been handed an *opportunity*. Time to channel your inner pit bull (and we know what PeTA would do to *her*).

    Some years ago, a teammate of mine led the charge to debunk a manufacturer of fraudulent “search and rescue” equipment (it was a $20,000 dowsing rod tarted up to look like a Klingon disrupter, and some of Your Tax Dollars were buying the things for law enforcement various places). He and I both received threats from embarrassed cops who “believed in” the whizzbox. I think the cease and desist letter from the scammers’ lawyer is still on his website. They didn’t even back down in the face of the double-blind testing and then dissection of the gizmo by Sandia Nat’l Labs (results: performance slightly worse than random chance, no operational circuitry).

    The shyster’s debating points sounded a lot like PeTA’s do now. Failed to intimidate my friend.

    Truth is an absolute defense against charges of libel. Truth is the last thing PeTA wants aired in public. If a dose of Truth doesn’t dissuade PeTA’s celebrity spokeswhores, maybe a big bolus of ugly notoriety will do it.

    Comment by H. Houlahan — March 28, 2008 @ 5:37 am

  21. Why does it seem as if the deep pocket organizations always have their scary letters at the ready for those of us who would reject their “nuanced version of the truth?”

    I’m no lawyer but it seems that if PETA wants a retraction they’ll have to first prove you wrong. Have they offered anything by way of documentation? Is their misuse of the word “shelter” not enough to exonerate you?

    Their scare tactics are indeed effective–I’d be quaking in my clogs if I received that letter. Luckily, their legal kneejerks also serve to remind us we’re on the right path.

    You’re a brave woman, Gina.

    Comment by Dr. Patty Khuly — March 28, 2008 @ 5:47 am

  22. from PETA’s website:

    “When animal companions become very sick and are suffering with no hope of recovery, and they seem incapable of truly enjoying life, it may be time to provide them with a peaceful death through euthanasia.”

    Does PETA apply their own philosophy to animals surrendered to its “shelter”? If so, WHAT IS GOING ON IN VA that is causing thousands of animals at ONE FACILITY ALONE to be so sick, suffering, no hope that treatment may help them and unable to enjoy life?

    Also from their site: “Euthanasia should always be performed by well-trained, caring staff members, and animals should never be euthanized in view of other animals.”

    Again, does PETA apply its own philosophy to animals surrendered to its “shelter”? I’m having trouble picturing how animals killed in the van were not within sight of the other victims waiting for their turn to be killed.

    Comment by slt — March 28, 2008 @ 6:28 am

  23. Gina has touched too close on the truth of what Peta is all about, and Peta is worried that some people that might have brains are left wondering exactly to what purpose Peta uses their donations. I definitely remember the dumpster case, where the vets were assured the animals would be found homes. Peta is not there to save animals, for sure! I look forward to the day when donations start dwindling as more truths come out. May it be soon! Gina, we are behind you all the way!

    Comment by Mary — March 28, 2008 @ 6:41 am

  24. Peta and the truth rarely seem to meet.

    I found it amusing that last year, when they were convicted of taking adoptable animals from shelters in NC, killing them in the van and dumping their bodies behind Piggly Wiggly, their justification was that they ‘owned the animals’and could do with them as they wished.

    How convenient.

    I wish all the ninnies who fund these cults would do some very superficial digging. They would discover that Peta and other radicals are absolutely not about animal welfare – they are working to end relationships that have continued for milennia because of a warped set of personal beliefs – which they use at their convenience.

    People Exterminating Trusting Animals

    Comment by Caveat — March 28, 2008 @ 6:41 am

  25. Comment by Mary — March 28, 2008 @ 6:41 am

    “Peta is worried that some people that might have brains are left wondering exactly to what purpose Peta uses their donations.”

    Um – at least some of it went for a freezer to store the bodies of all the animals they’re so busy killing:

    http://www.petakillsanimals.com/petaKillsAnimals.cfm

    Yup. Cuz’ it cost more to CARE FOR animals than it does to KILL them.

    Comment by The OTHER Pat — March 28, 2008 @ 7:01 am

  26. PETA and Atty Kerr appear to have confused the words “truth” and “truthiness” as being synonmous. I would submit that what they are ascribing to in the communications referred to is truthiness not truth.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truthiness

    Comment by Janeen — March 28, 2008 @ 7:17 am

  27. Let’s just keep saying PETA. It would be good if this thread and others like it ( PETA ) would Google really well for anyone searching for information about PETA ( PETA ).

    Comment by emily — March 28, 2008 @ 8:00 am

  28. I like it!

    PETA. PETA.

    PETAPETAPETAPETAPETAPETAPETAPETAPETAPETAPETAPETAPETAPETAPETAPETAPETAPETAPETAPETAPETAPETAPETAPETAPETAPETAPETAPETA

    VBG!

    Comment by The OTHER Pat — March 28, 2008 @ 8:20 am

  29. Comment by H. Houlahan — March 28, 2008 @ 5:37 am

    “PeTA’s defense IN COURT for the back-alley killing of adoptable animals they had acquired under false pretenses was that the animals were OWNED by PeTA, and they could do whatever they liked with them.”

    Wait a minute. I thought PeTA was against the OWNERSHIP of animals.

    What – more “Do as I say, not as I do” from PeTA?

    What a surprise. Not.

    Comment by The OTHER Pat — March 28, 2008 @ 8:34 am

  30. 7 Things You Didn’t Know About PeTA

    1. PeTA has stated repeatedly that their goal is “total animal liberation.” This means no pets, no meat, no milk, no zoos, no circuses, no fishing, no hunting, no farming, no leather, and no animal testing for lifesaving medicines.
    2. PeTA has given tens of thousands of dollars to convicted arsonists and other violent criminals.
    3. PeTA funds the misnamed Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine an animal-rights organization that presents itself as an unbiased source for nutritional information and has links to violent animal-rights groups called SHAC and ALF.
    4. PeTA has used their contributors tax-exempt donations to fund the North American Earth Liberation front and the Animal Liberation Front, FBI-certified domestic terrorist groups responsible for fire bombs and death threats.
    5. PeTA regularly targets kids as early as elementary school with anti-meat and anti-milk propaganda. They are totally opposed to traditional farming methods.
    6. PeTA spends less than one percent of its $13 million budget actually caring for animals. PeTA kills animals.
    7. PeTA has repeatedly attacked groups like the March of Dimes, the Pediatric AIDS Foundation, and the American Cancer Society, for conducting animal testing to find cures for birth defects and life-threatening diseases.
    source: http://www.consumerfreedom.com
    http://www.animalscam.com
    http://www.petakillsanimals.com
    http://www.naiaonline.org

    Comment by Elizabeth — March 28, 2008 @ 9:48 am

  31. Its nice to know that there are still people in this world that have the coomen snese to see throught the lies and propaganda that PETA has been spreading for years. I am a private breeder of American Pit Bull Terriers and can tell you first hand about the propaganda tactics PETA uses to spread fear and lies. They use the donations the get from innocent people to accomplish their goals of NO pet onwership at all. This includes the keeping of gold fish as this would be cruel to the extremist. There is a big difference between animal welfare and animal rights. We all want to see animals treated with care but they are not people and we shouldnt think of them as such. As long as my animals are healty and happy I, as a dog owner should not have to live in fear for keeping anf breeding one of the greatest breeds of dogs that ever lived. I dont need some so called extremeist telling me how to house, care for and love my animals!! I take my hat off to Gina Spadafori!!! Keep up the good work…its also nice to see a jounalist report the truth with out adding a personal spin on the story!

    Comment by Barry Barzini — March 28, 2008 @ 12:53 pm

  32. P.S. Please excuse all my typo’s

    Comment by Barry Barzini — March 28, 2008 @ 12:55 pm

  33. More About PeTA!

    http://www.activistcash.com/organization_overview.cfm/oid/21

    PETA is not an animal welfare organization.
    PETA spends less than one percent of its multi-million dollar budget actually helping animals. The group euthanized (killed) more than 1,900 animals in 2003 alone — that’s over 85 percent of the animals it received. In fact, from July 1998 through the end of 2003, PETA killed over 10,000 dogs, cats, and other “companion animals” at its Norfolk, Virginia headquarters. That’s more than five animals every day. On its 2002 federal income-tax return, PETA claimed a $9,370 expense for a giant walk-in freezer, the kind most people use as a meat locker or for ice-cream storage. But animal-rights activists don’t eat meat or dairy foods. So far, the group hasn’t confirmed the obvious — that it’s using the appliance to store the bodies of its victims.

    PETA assaults common decency.
    PETA’s leadership has compared animal farmers to serial killer (and cannibal) Jeffrey Dahmer. They proclaimed in a 2003 exhibit that chickens are as valuable as Jewish Holocaust victims. They announced with a 2001 billboard that a shark attack on a little boy was “revenge” against humans who had it coming anyway. They have branded parents who feed their kids meat and milk “child abusers.” In 2002 PETA organized a campaign to sabotage a popular Thanksgiving hotline, which provides free advice about cooking turkeys. The group has even contemplated (literally) dancing on the grave of Kentucky Fried Chicken’s Colonel Sanders. And in 2003, PETA president Ingrid Newkirk wrote to Yasser Arafat, pleading with him to make certain no animals are harmed in Palestinian suicide-bombing attacks.

    PETA peddles its “animal liberation” food agenda through a medical front group that pretends to offer objective nutritional advice.
    A group misleadingly named the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM) has duped the press into believing that it is an association of conscientious doctors promoting good nutrition. In fact, it is a PETA front group. PCRM and PETA share money, offices, and staff. The American Medical Association calls PCRM a “pseudo-physicians group,” has demanded that PCRM stop its “inappropriate and unethical tactics used to manipulate public opinion,” and argues that PCRM has been “blatantly misleading Americans” and “concealing its true purpose as an animal ‘rights’ organization.”

    Taking a page out of PETA’s press book, PCRM has labeled U.S. school lunches “weapons of mass destruction” because they include meat and milk. PCRM’s president, a psychiatrist named Neal Barnard, recently duped Newsweek into covering his “study” (of seven people) supposedly demonstrating that a vegan diet helped prevent type-2 diabetes. In 2002, PCRM was cited in major newspapers more than 550 times. It was identified as an animal-rights organization in only a handful of those cases.

    PETA exploits sick people.
    PETA famously suggested that drinking milk causes cancer, in an advertisement mocking then-NYC Mayor Rudy Guliani with the words “Got Prostate Cancer?” PETA has also erected a billboard reading: “Got Sick Kids? Drinking milk contributes to colic, ear infections, allergies, diabetes, obesity, and many other illnesses.” In 2003 the group held a demonstration in front of a Toronto-area hospital that was under a SARS-related quarantine, spuriously alleging that animal husbandry has something to do with the epidemic’s spread. Upon hearing that Charlton Heston had fallen ill with Alzheimer’s Disease, Ingrid Newkirk suggested that PETA would “toy with the idea that both Alzheimer’s and CJD [Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease] are related to meat consumption.” According to a profile in The New Yorker, she considered “renting billboards that would display a large picture of a gaunt Charlton Heston foaming at the mouth.”

    PETA propagandizes children.
    PETA’s website for kids puts a skull and crossbones next to the logo of Disney’s Animal Kingdom and tells the horror story of a fast food restaurant employee who “had taken a patty into the potty with her, then returned and said she had peed on it.” It hands out trading cards to kids that allege drinking milk will make them fat, pimply, flatulent, and phlegm-ridden. PETA also has a child-themed website, and a kiddie-oriented magazine, called GRRR! Kids Bite Back. The name is significant, as it is intended to prep children to identify with the Animal Liberation Front (ALF), which has long-used the phrase “bite back” in its promotional materials. In fact, as early as 1991, convicted ALF arsonist and PETA grantee Rodney Coronado was calling his own crime spree “Operation Bite Back.” PETA also sends “humane education lecturer” Gary Yourofsky into high schools — and even middle schools — to promote the “animal liberation” agenda. Yourofsky is a convicted ALF criminal who has said he would support burning down medical research labs even if humans were trapped in the flames.

    PETA distorts religious teachings.
    Not only does PETA oppose the age-old Jewish tradition of Kosher slaughter, but the group’s leaders maintain that Jews have misinterpreted their own sacred texts on the subject. They also claim, ignoring mountains of scripture to the contrary, that Jesus was a vegetarian. PETA celebrated Easter in 2003 with a billboard depicting a pig, reading “he died for your sins.” PETA also insists (again, selectively ignoring contradictory evidence) that Muhammad “was not a meat-eater.” In his speeches to adolescents, Gary Yourofsky regularly compares himself to Gandhi and Jesus Christ. PETA’s in-school presentations include the application of “do unto others as you would have them do unto you” to birds and turtles — not people.

    PETA opposes life-saving medical research.
    PETA has repeatedly attacked groups like the March of Dimes, the Pediatric AIDS Foundation, and the American Cancer Society, for conducting animal testing to find cures for birth defects and life-threatening diseases. When asked if she would oppose an experiment on five thousand rats if it would result in a cure for AIDS, Newkirk responded: “Would you be opposed to experiments on your daughter if you knew it would save fifty million people?” In addition to opposing any and all medical research that uses animals, PETA also insults medical professionals by arguing, with a straight face, that animal testing is a counterproductive means of finding cures for human diseases.

    PETA devalues human life.
    PETA’s efforts to treasure every mosquito and cockroach invariably lead them to hate human beings for using bug spray and RAID. Ingrid Newkirk argues that as human beings, “we’re the biggest blight on the face of the earth.”

    PETA openly supports violence and terrorist activity.
    PETA has long-standing ties to militant groups like the Animal Liberation Front (ALF), and the Earth Liberation Front (ELF). The FBI calls these criminal groups a “serious domestic terrorist threat.”

    Comment by Nancy — March 28, 2008 @ 1:02 pm

  34. You guys are all 100% spot on. Loved reading your comments (and I want cake TOO)!!
    But you know what is more scary then the radicals you can SEE are nuts? That would be the ones that SEEM more normal
    Take HSUS for instance. Most people think they fund the Humane Societies around the country that are crying out for funding, but NOT SO. They are another political group and that is where your donations go if you support them. To lobbying for things like Constitutional Rights for Pregnant Pigs in FL. Yup – you DID read that right, and you know what? It WORKED. They successfully got that one passed by putting a ton of their funding behind it and using the donations that people thought were going to the pets, for lobbying.
    PETA and HSUS, same beast, different clothing. Rather the dragon you can see then 1000 snakes in the grass!

    Comment by Phoebe — March 28, 2008 @ 3:11 pm

  35. I wonder if PETA might want to rethink their litte intimidation compaign. Nothing like a threat to get us motivated. I’ve sent the links in this thread to my pet owners list (which I started to alert friends about the numerous pet food recalls). Its only about 60 people long – but I have asked them to pass this on to all of their pet loving friends.

    Now everyone won’t, but I’m betting that several hundred people who don’t know much about PETA except their general nuttiness(but maybe some who do, and maybe even some who donated to them) are going to have some interesting reading to do over the weekend.

    And I promise Gina, Nathan and anyone else who gets one of these letters, that everytime I hear about it, I will take some type of action to let people know the truth about PETA.

    The irony here is an organization that professes to be pro-animal is now attacking people that have done so much to help animals. Really help animals. Not gas them and leave their remains in dumpsters.

    If it weren’t for PetConnection (and a few other sites) many more animals would have died from the bad pet food last year. And Nathan has done more than anyone I can think of to get us to think differently about the adoptability of pets.

    Shame on you PETA!

    Comment by 2CatMom — March 28, 2008 @ 3:18 pm

  36. Bravo Gina!!!!
    I’ll be making cake and eating it to!

    PeTA PeTA PeTA PeTA…Yes Shame on YOU!

    Here is a Video that dipicts and proves that they/ AR Terrorists, have Indeed Infiltrated our Shelters and Government Officials as well!

    Sick Sick Sick PeTA!!

    They say a picture is worth a thousand words. Perhaps a video will be worth
    a million.

    It is in two parts:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8z5uuAN3QgA

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCTWzLwZH8E

    Comment by Nancy — March 28, 2008 @ 4:29 pm

  37. Get em where it Hurts!

    http://www.petitiononline.com/rvkptaex/

    To: The Internal Revenue Service of the United States.
    Peta (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) have been making over 10 million dollars per year in donations over the last 5 years. On their website, it is shown that your donation will go to help the animals, but it has been discovered otherwise.

    Peta has been granted a tax-exempt status on all donations they receive.

    To be eligible for 501(c) (3) tax exemption, a group must be organized and operate exclusively for charitable purposes. Its activities cannot be illegal, or “in conflict with express statutory restrictions.” And its activities must promote its main purpose.

    It was recently discovered that Peta donated $1,500 to the Earth Liberation Front (ELF) to support their ìprogram activities” back in the year 2000.

    ELF is considered a terrorist organization by the FBI, and they are not unjustified.

    Their “program activities” include the arson of a $12 million mountaintop lodge at Vail, spiking trees in Idaho’s Nez Perce National, burning down a barn and cutting fences at a wild horse facility run by the Bureau of Land Management, setting fire to a biotechnology research facility at the University of Minnesota, and numerous other destructive acts. According to the FBI’s counterterrorism division, ELF has caused $43 million in damage in the past six years.

    The Center for Consumer Freedom has recently discovered that Peta donated $45,000 to the “support committee” for Rodney Coronado, who was convicted of setting fire to a research facility at Michigan State University. They have also discovered that Peta donated $5,000 dollars to the committee for Josh Harper, an associate with ELF’s sister organization, the Animal Liberation Front, (ALF) who also commit to violent acts.

    I view these as acts of terrorism, extortion, and intimidation, and certainly do not consider them applicatory to the definition of requirements for eligibility for tax-exempt status.

    We would like the IRS to please launch a review of Peta’s tax exempt status, and become familiarized with the organization. They may find that Peta, as an organization, does not deserve the tax exemption they recieve.

    Here, again, is the definition.

    To be eligible for 501(c)(3) tax exemption, a group must be organized and operate exclusively for charitable purposes. Its activities cannot be illegal, or “in conflict with express statutory restrictions.” And its activities must promote its main purpose.

    Do they fit?

    Petition for the review by the IRS for tax-exempt donations to Peta.

    Thanks for the consideration -Jack McLarty
    http://www.petaa.com petaa@petaa.com

    Sincerely,

    The Undersigned

    Comment by Nancy — March 28, 2008 @ 4:41 pm

  38. What a waste of life of our Men and Women/Soldiers in a useless war…. who are protecting our freedom, when we are IN a WAR to protect our own safety, rights and freedom, in our Own Homeland against terrorists & of the like, PeTA!
    Wake up America!

    Comment by Nancy — March 28, 2008 @ 5:03 pm

  39. http://youtube.com/watch?v=l9ijLulwUTY

    I think more Celebs should tell it like it is….like Penn and Teller!

    Comment by Nancy — March 28, 2008 @ 6:06 pm

  40. Mr. Kerr is attempting “libel chill”, albeit very poorly. The truth will hurt you, Mr. Kerr.

    Somebody tell Kerr to stick a needle up it.
    Preferably one of Peta’s.

    If Ingrid has seven lawyers, I bet that’s a minimum of $700K annually in salaries, then add on benefits, retirement…wonder how many donors to Peta would like to know exactly how much Peta spends on their legal team, considering that the rough numbers sound like a million dollars?

    Peta can’t pay for veterinary treatment for animals, but has a million bucks to throw around on land sharks in suits?

    Comment by Social Mange — March 28, 2008 @ 8:12 pm

  41. And if Peta is so against medical research, perhaps Ingrid Newkirk would like to explain how she can justify taking painkillers after an accident.

    The author of the blog should be pleased that Peta is sufficiently frightened by the blog post to attempt this. Rather qualifies the blog’s status, don’t you think?

    Mr. Kerr, have you ever heard of Pandora’s box?

    You may be very sorry you opened it.

    Comment by Social Mange — March 28, 2008 @ 8:27 pm

  42. http://www.consumerfreedom.com/article_detail.cfm/article/154

    Another Petition!

    Take a Bite out of PETA

    Sign the petition to have PETA’s tax-exemption status removed

    Despite its deceptively warm-and-fuzzy public image, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) has donated over $150,000 to criminal activists — including those jailed for arson, burglary, and even attempted murder. In 2001, PETA donated $1,500 to the North American Earth Liberation Front, a criminal organization that the FBI classifies as “domestic terrorists.” And since 2000, rank-and-file PETA activists have been arrested over 80 times for breaking various laws during PETA protests. Charges included felony obstruction of government property, criminal mischief, assaulting a cabinet official, felony vandalism, performing obscene acts in public, destruction of federal property, and burglary.

    Comment by Nancy — March 29, 2008 @ 4:56 am

  43. Maybe more Former PeTA Members will come forward to Gnaw at Ingrid’s Throat….
    See Below Link!

    http://www.nokillnow.com/PETAIngridNewkirkResign.htm

    Comment by Nancy — March 29, 2008 @ 7:13 am

  44. Please, you can’t expect someone intelligent to believe for one moment that PeTA’s Jeff Kerr is telling anything truthful in the letter to Nathan Winograd. Facts are facts and Nathan Winograd researched every statistic before publishing them.

    PeTA is running scared and they should. There will be a day when PeTA will be diminished and in my opinion that day cannot be too soon!

    Keep up the great work Mr. Winograd for without, we cannot expect to change and reverse bad pet leigislation.

    Comment by gail — March 29, 2008 @ 8:34 am

  45. “If” the animals were sick, I guess that PETA saw no way out, except to euthanize them?

    It seems to me that it is getting just too convenient for our society to make judgments to “throw away” animals (and people, for that matter), who are deemed as being too sick to help or even make comfortable if they are on their way out of this life?

    On the human side, it’s my understanding that the state of Washington has passed the Physician Assisted Suicide law (already legal in Oregon), and again California legislature is going to try and get it passed. What really stinks in California (don’t know about the other two states) is that if they pass this law, there is no real alternative of adequate end of life care if the person is diagnosed as terminal and wants to live out their life. It’s all being done in the name of “compassion.” Sigh…

    What is happening to our society? We seem to be taking our “throw away” mentality now to the “nth” degree, in throwing away both animal and human life that we deem as not being worth living.

    It couldn’t be about saving money, could it??? Silly me, that thought crossed my mind for a second.

    Comment by Marcy — March 29, 2008 @ 8:42 am

  46. Comment by Nancy — March 29, 2008 @ 7:13 am
    From the link Nancy posted:
    “In 1991, PETA killed 18 rabbits and 14 roosters it had previously “rescued” from a research facility. ‘We just don’t have the money’ to care for them, then PETA-Chairman Alex Pacheco told the Washington Times. ‘The PETA animal shelter had run out of room.'”

    No idea what PETA’s kill rate among animals in search of new homes was in 1991, but if it’s anything similar to 2006 – Does the PETA “shelter” only have enough room/money for 2 cats and 8 dogs over the course of a year?

    Comment by slt — March 29, 2008 @ 10:04 am

  47. From “No Kill Now” article:

    “Although PETA is not a shelter organization, it killed more animals each year than 75% of the animal control shelters in Virginia.”

    “Wrote Kanak Roy, M.D. of the Animal Aid Alliance in Virginia Beach, in a commentary typical of many that ANIMAL PEOPLE received from activists around the world, “I have had disagreements with Newkirk in the past, but regardless of her troubling philosophy, I have continued to defend her publicly. I have lobbied several local news commentators on her behalf.

    **However, the belief that PETA’s unconscionable actions are in support of animal welfare, and the idea that they are any way reducing suffering, is pathological.”** (emphasis mine) ––M.C.”

    http://www.nokillnow.com/PETAanimalpeople.htm

    Comment by Nadine L. — March 29, 2008 @ 10:14 am

  48. My wife already has heard my rant about Peta … the short answer is “see you in court, sir.” Yes, I also bake!

    Comment by Russell Long — March 29, 2008 @ 2:57 pm

  49. PETA is a huge scam and they feed on people who do not know what they are really about. There are pictures of the president in a white haz-mat suit with dead dogs all around her, because she feels that NOBODY should own pets and they should all run free. Yes people, no cats, no dogs, no horses, no hamsters, no fish, NOTHING. People really need to do their research on organizations before giving them money.

    Makes me ill.

    Comment by Jenn Ryan — March 29, 2008 @ 6:27 pm

  50. QUOTE: “Did we euthanize some animals who could have been adopted? Maybe.”
    — PETA’s Domestic Animal Issues & Abuse Department director Daphna Nachminovitch, in The Virginian-Pilot

    Comment by Nancy — March 30, 2008 @ 8:02 am

  51. If you believe in evolution: The caveman domesticated the first animals. They also hunted for food.
    If you believe in God: He was the creator of the food chain.

    Comment by Joe W — March 30, 2008 @ 8:54 am

  52. These are the same people that tried to stop hunters from hunting in Maine.Hunters do NOT go out and just kill animals because it a thing to do.Most ethical hunters eat what the kill UNLIKE this group!! Thank you Gina Spadafori for bringing this unethical group out of their holes and making the truth the truth!! Kerr..why don’t you crawl back into your hole before your put to death by the facts..you may lose your job now!
    Are there any cupcakes left?? LOL

    Comment by Wanda — March 30, 2008 @ 5:59 pm

  53. http://www.youtube.com/v/itswGWddk2A

    The Truth About PeTA Video!
    Warning Graphic!

    Rot in Hell PeTA!

    Comment by Nancy — March 31, 2008 @ 4:34 am

  54. I think the smartest course of action is to continue to gnaw away at PETA and their people until they do slap a lawsuit against one of us…then make the case a media circus!! What they can do we can do too…..pass the cupcakes…

    Comment by Jhaine — April 2, 2008 @ 4:55 pm

  55. Hi Gina –
    Yes – according to what I’ve read – your stats on PETA’s killing is a little off. It was actually MORE than 97%! Let’s give them credit – they’re good – AT KILLING! Sure wish they’d just leave this world to heal itself – – from them!

    Comment by Carol — April 24, 2008 @ 12:19 am

  56. After reading the following quotes I’m beginning to believe that is the case of cats and dogs the the actual agenda for PETA is genocide on domestic pets..
    “The cat, like the dog, must disappear… We should cut the domestic cat free from our dominance by neutering, neutering, and more neutering, until our pathetic version of the cat ceases to exist.”
    — John Bryant, Fettered Kingdoms: An Examination of A Changing Ethic (Washington, DC: People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), 1982, p. 15 and Quoted in Animal People, May 1993

    “In a perfect world, all other than human animals would be free of human interference, and dogs and cats would be part of the ecological scheme.”
    — PETA’s Statement on Companion Animals

    And Ingrid Newkirk is experienced when it comes to the slaughtering of animals.

    “I would go to work early, before anyone got there, and I would just kill the animals myself. Because I couldn’t stand to let them go through other workers abusing the animals. I must have killed thousands of them, sometimes dozens everyday.”
    — Ingrid Newkirk, President, PETA, The New Yorker, April 14, 2003

    Comment by Cybersynaptics — July 1, 2008 @ 9:31 am

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a comment


Syndication

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Categories

website design by Black Dog Studios