CharethCutestory
Active Member
Absolutely right. Don't be put off from posting.
You may or may not have changed your mind slightly on an issue since you started having this discussion. That is my point.
It's good to talk.
Peta
- Thread starter alma matters
- Start date
Absolutely right. Don't be put off from posting.
You may or may not have changed your mind slightly on an issue since you started having this discussion. That is my point.
It's good to talk.
at any rate it's always usefull to check who is putting out this information. these consumer freedom people obviously have motives to put peta down. why not post a link from the fur commission? they will say the same stuff to discredit their arch-enemy peta.
I can only say that I am with an animal rights group in austria that has been declared 'right wing' by iTs oponents in the press. I know all these people and they are all very much on the left - so it's the most absurd accusation I've ever heard. it's clear to me now - from personal experience - that that kind of stuff is often invented by oponents of animal rights to discredit them in the media.
I can only say that I am with an animal rights group in austria that has been declared 'right wing' by iTs oponents in the press. I know all these people and they are all very much on the left - so it's the most absurd accusation I've ever heard. it's clear to me now - from personal experience - that that kind of stuff is often invented by oponents of animal rights to discredit them in the media.
I'm not sure that no-kill shelters are as charming in reality as they are as a concept. Socialized animals end up awaiting their natural deaths as caged livestock. I think lethal injection may often be much more humane. That idea certainly does ignite a powder keg of adolescent rage about the injustices of life; but, animals die. One way or another.
Worm
Taste the diffidence
Since most of the people writing in this thread claim to be unbiased parties who are simply looking for the truth, I'm sure everyone will want to know about the people spreading this information about PETA. Of course, it is completely understandable that a naive innocent could stumble across a couple of websites devoted almost entirely to attacking PETA on one hand and helping corporations that benefit from animal exploitation on the other-- Google is obviously a danger to some people, as we all know-- so we shouldn't be too hard on these simple, truth-loving souls.
From Source Watch:
The Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF) (formerly called the "Guest Choice Network") is a front group for the restaurant, alcohol and tobacco industries. It runs media campaigns which oppose the efforts of scientists, doctors, health advocates, environmentalists and groups like Mothers Against Drunk Driving, calling them "the Nanny Culture -- the growing fraternity of food cops, health care enforcers, anti-meat activists, and meddling bureaucrats who 'know what's best for you.' "
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Center_for_Consumer_Freedom
According to Source Watch, funding for the CCF has come from corporations like Wendy's, Applebee's, Perdue Farms, Tyson Foods, Coca-Cola, Outback Steakhouse, Standard Meat, and others.
They are apparently responsible for the site "Peta Kills Animals" as well.
Here's more:
"Does PETA kill animals? Says who?"
Following PETA's worldwide protests against Iams vivisection, a certain "Center for Consumer Freedom" has been trying to discredit Peta's campaign by saying that Peta kills non-human animals and by launching a website called petakillsanimals.com. As if to prove their point, it was reported in the US media that two Peta campaigners were involved in the killing of dogs and of dumping them in the trash. Peta has disassociated itself from these actions and has started its own investigations while condemning the actions of these two individuals if what they are accused of is true.
In a news conference at PETA’s Norfolk headquarters, President Ingrid Newkirk said the dumping was “hideous, it’s wrong, and it never should have happened. We would absolutely never condone this behavior”. PETA is investigating the incident.
“That conduct disgusts us,” Newkirk said of the dumping. “It shames us. It violates our own protocols, it happened without our knowledge and can never be allowed to happen again. But our work is important and our work must go on.”
Newkirk said her organization got involved in North Carolina after learning about conditions at "shelters" there. She said PETA investigators found that non-human animals were dying in the "shelters" or being put to death inhumanely. PETA never opposed euthanising non-human animals who would otherwise die a painful death. However, Newkirk said that animal cruelty charges against two of its employees won't stick. Newkirk says there was NO indication of pain or suffering among the 18 non-human animals police found in a shopping center garbage bin or the 13 found in a van registered to PETA.
It should also be pointed out that the actions of two individuals does not discredit Peta's work. Neither does it change anything regarding its stand against Iams vivisection.
What is the Center for Consumer Freedom, and why is it attacking PETA?
The Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF) is a nonprofit corporation run by lobbyist Richard Berman through his Washington DC-based for-profit public relations company, Berman & Co. The CCF, formerly known as the Guest Choice Network, was set up by Berman with a $600,000 "donation" from tobacco company Philip Morris.
Berman arranges for large sums of corporate money to find its way into nonprofit societies of which he is the executive director. He then hires his own company as a consultant to these nonprofit groups. Of the millions of dollars "donated" by Philip Morris between the years 1995 and 1998, 49 percent to 79 percent went directly to Berman or Berman & Co.
Richard Berman is an influence peddler. He has worked out a scheme to funnel charitable donations from wealthy corporations into his own pocket. In exchange, he provides a flurry of disinformation, flawed studies, op-ed pieces, letters to the editor, and trade-industry articles, as well as access to his high-level government contracts, who are servants of the industries he represents.
Using "freedom of choice" as his battle cry, Berman has now taken on PETA and a number of other groups and organisations whose point of view could have an impact on the profits of his clients by waking consumers up. Berman's Guest Choice Network has an "advisory panel" whose members in 1998 included officials representing companies ranging from Cargill Processed Meat Products and Outback Steakhouse to Minnesota Licensed Beverage Association and Sutter Home Winery. Berman's clients are companies with vested interests in low employee wages; cheap, unhealthy restaurant-chain food, particularly "meat"; and tobacco, soft drink, and alcohol consumption.
Worthy of note is that the lies Berman says could kill humans if taken seriously, and this from a man who is saying PETA kills non-human animals! An article in the December 15, 1999 copy of the Cleveland Plain Dealer describes Berman's support for Uniroyal, the company that produces Alar(tm), a pesticide used on apples. Through his Guest Choice Network, Berman published a newsletter that minimised the risks of Alar to children. The newsletter stated, "According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), one would have to eat 50,000 pounds of apples a day over a lifetime to contract cancer from Alar". In response, EPA spokeswoman Denise Kearns said, "To my knowledge, EPA never issued that kind of statement". In the end Berman admitted that the source of his information was a statement made by Uniroyal. Alar has since been banned due to cancer risks.
PETA's recent successes in gaining "fast-food" industry concessions for more humane conditions for "farm animals" have sent ripples of fear through the food and beverage service industry. About the same time that McDonald's buckled to PETA's demands, Richard Berman changed his front group's name and stepped up his attacks.
From Source Watch:
The Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF) (formerly called the "Guest Choice Network") is a front group for the restaurant, alcohol and tobacco industries. It runs media campaigns which oppose the efforts of scientists, doctors, health advocates, environmentalists and groups like Mothers Against Drunk Driving, calling them "the Nanny Culture -- the growing fraternity of food cops, health care enforcers, anti-meat activists, and meddling bureaucrats who 'know what's best for you.' "
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Center_for_Consumer_Freedom
According to Source Watch, funding for the CCF has come from corporations like Wendy's, Applebee's, Perdue Farms, Tyson Foods, Coca-Cola, Outback Steakhouse, Standard Meat, and others.
They are apparently responsible for the site "Peta Kills Animals" as well.
Here's more:
"Does PETA kill animals? Says who?"
Following PETA's worldwide protests against Iams vivisection, a certain "Center for Consumer Freedom" has been trying to discredit Peta's campaign by saying that Peta kills non-human animals and by launching a website called petakillsanimals.com. As if to prove their point, it was reported in the US media that two Peta campaigners were involved in the killing of dogs and of dumping them in the trash. Peta has disassociated itself from these actions and has started its own investigations while condemning the actions of these two individuals if what they are accused of is true.
In a news conference at PETA’s Norfolk headquarters, President Ingrid Newkirk said the dumping was “hideous, it’s wrong, and it never should have happened. We would absolutely never condone this behavior”. PETA is investigating the incident.
“That conduct disgusts us,” Newkirk said of the dumping. “It shames us. It violates our own protocols, it happened without our knowledge and can never be allowed to happen again. But our work is important and our work must go on.”
Newkirk said her organization got involved in North Carolina after learning about conditions at "shelters" there. She said PETA investigators found that non-human animals were dying in the "shelters" or being put to death inhumanely. PETA never opposed euthanising non-human animals who would otherwise die a painful death. However, Newkirk said that animal cruelty charges against two of its employees won't stick. Newkirk says there was NO indication of pain or suffering among the 18 non-human animals police found in a shopping center garbage bin or the 13 found in a van registered to PETA.
It should also be pointed out that the actions of two individuals does not discredit Peta's work. Neither does it change anything regarding its stand against Iams vivisection.
What is the Center for Consumer Freedom, and why is it attacking PETA?
The Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF) is a nonprofit corporation run by lobbyist Richard Berman through his Washington DC-based for-profit public relations company, Berman & Co. The CCF, formerly known as the Guest Choice Network, was set up by Berman with a $600,000 "donation" from tobacco company Philip Morris.
Berman arranges for large sums of corporate money to find its way into nonprofit societies of which he is the executive director. He then hires his own company as a consultant to these nonprofit groups. Of the millions of dollars "donated" by Philip Morris between the years 1995 and 1998, 49 percent to 79 percent went directly to Berman or Berman & Co.
Richard Berman is an influence peddler. He has worked out a scheme to funnel charitable donations from wealthy corporations into his own pocket. In exchange, he provides a flurry of disinformation, flawed studies, op-ed pieces, letters to the editor, and trade-industry articles, as well as access to his high-level government contracts, who are servants of the industries he represents.
Using "freedom of choice" as his battle cry, Berman has now taken on PETA and a number of other groups and organisations whose point of view could have an impact on the profits of his clients by waking consumers up. Berman's Guest Choice Network has an "advisory panel" whose members in 1998 included officials representing companies ranging from Cargill Processed Meat Products and Outback Steakhouse to Minnesota Licensed Beverage Association and Sutter Home Winery. Berman's clients are companies with vested interests in low employee wages; cheap, unhealthy restaurant-chain food, particularly "meat"; and tobacco, soft drink, and alcohol consumption.
Worthy of note is that the lies Berman says could kill humans if taken seriously, and this from a man who is saying PETA kills non-human animals! An article in the December 15, 1999 copy of the Cleveland Plain Dealer describes Berman's support for Uniroyal, the company that produces Alar(tm), a pesticide used on apples. Through his Guest Choice Network, Berman published a newsletter that minimised the risks of Alar to children. The newsletter stated, "According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), one would have to eat 50,000 pounds of apples a day over a lifetime to contract cancer from Alar". In response, EPA spokeswoman Denise Kearns said, "To my knowledge, EPA never issued that kind of statement". In the end Berman admitted that the source of his information was a statement made by Uniroyal. Alar has since been banned due to cancer risks.
PETA's recent successes in gaining "fast-food" industry concessions for more humane conditions for "farm animals" have sent ripples of fear through the food and beverage service industry. About the same time that McDonald's buckled to PETA's demands, Richard Berman changed his front group's name and stepped up his attacks.
CharethCutestory
Active Member
You're absolutely right to question things you read. However, many different "opponents" (or news broadcasters) seem to have reported on this and many other stories of the alledged hypocrisy of this organisation.
Puddle
Banned
I remember a time when whenever a thread like this popped up, someone else would beat me to this....
The websites Chareth posts are from organizations set up by and funded by the meat and dairy industry. According to Peta, those statistics are not right. Furthermore, i read claims that there has been cases where the meat industry, or those sympathetic with the meat induustry, purposely joined Peta campaigns in order to do something that looks bad to Peta (kill animals). Also, Peta is a large organization and sometimes a local Peta member or coordinator does something against Peta policy, which in turn makes Peta look bad.
They have, however, euthanized animals marked for death and unable to find a foster home. These were animals in surplus and Peta decided that such campaigns are needed so the animals die in a way considered humane. This has been criticized greatly by other animal rights activists. Not to mention it demonstrated 'hypocrite' press. So it depends where you stand on this issue. I also don't know if Peta still does this. I am not a member and I do not keep up with whatever they are doing but it may be likely they dropped this practice considering the bad press.
so...I would join smaller groups who need your money more than PETA. also, smaller groups can monitor and account for their actions and members more closely than a large group like PETA.
The websites Chareth posts are from organizations set up by and funded by the meat and dairy industry. According to Peta, those statistics are not right. Furthermore, i read claims that there has been cases where the meat industry, or those sympathetic with the meat induustry, purposely joined Peta campaigns in order to do something that looks bad to Peta (kill animals). Also, Peta is a large organization and sometimes a local Peta member or coordinator does something against Peta policy, which in turn makes Peta look bad.
They have, however, euthanized animals marked for death and unable to find a foster home. These were animals in surplus and Peta decided that such campaigns are needed so the animals die in a way considered humane. This has been criticized greatly by other animal rights activists. Not to mention it demonstrated 'hypocrite' press. So it depends where you stand on this issue. I also don't know if Peta still does this. I am not a member and I do not keep up with whatever they are doing but it may be likely they dropped this practice considering the bad press.
so...I would join smaller groups who need your money more than PETA. also, smaller groups can monitor and account for their actions and members more closely than a large group like PETA.
CharethCutestory
Active Member
What you've done there is added a counter arguement to the links provided. That is how to have a structured discussion. Some people here should take note of that.
You're signature is wonderf..... BOOM - Did somebody say WONDER?
Still Tired
as it were...
No, of course I agree that euthanasia can be the kindest option, I just far more prefer the idea of it not being the first option, that there are people prepared- if it's in the animals best interests- to spend money on long term care. I'm sure each case is weighed up and decisions made accordingly, I can't imagine them wanting cages and cages of miserable desperate dogs. I feel sorry for any animal ending up in these rescue places to be honest, none seem particularly comforting places to be, but that's the way it is.
Worm
Taste the diffidence
Hypocrisy? Granted, the mission statement of PETA is to save animals from cruel deaths and doubtless they want to save as many lives as possible. However, the title of the group is the simplest and strongest indication of what they stand for: the ethical treatment of animals. As any pet owner will agree, sometimes the ethical treatment of an animal means killing it. It is possible to produce a few quotations by PETA members (like Ingrid Newkirk) which are unbelievably stupid, and also possible to dredge up a few unfortunate news stories about "dumpings" and other horrors, but PETA does a great deal of good. No matter how many animals PETA is responsible for killing, they have saved or improved the lives of millions more. I think there are other organizations whose hypocrisy you might want to highlight, such as the Bush White House, those fervent Christians who have killed-- how many people now? *checking watch*
I have absolutely no interest in what the fur comission or the consumer freedom people might have to say about peta but here is what I think: I think that they have lost some sense of reality. Some of their campaigns - like the anti milk campaign - seem contraproductive to me. The world is certainly not ready for veganism - and I think to propagate veganism now can turn off more people than it would attract. In a world where 98% of the people eat meat you just cannot ask the world to become vegan. They really should concentrate on vegetarian first. Also, some of their campaigns like holocaust on your plate one alienate more people than it would do good, I think, and that is always very unfortunate.
I donated to Peta once for their online undercover video reports, because I believe that's a great thing.
But I think that it's better to be active or donate to a european group, actually, because more can be legally achieved in europe. It is rather useless to hope for any kind of animal welfare laws in america right now - the bush administration has zero interest in animal welfare - and therefore better to fight for improvement here in europe, I think. in austria, we have achieved quite a lot over the past years, seriously. battery cages will be illegal soon, supermarkets already do not sell those battery eggs anymore do to our actions and demos, fur farms are illegal, and we achieved that almost all big clothing stores no longer sell fur, and wild animals in circuses have also been outlawed, for example.
I donated to Peta once for their online undercover video reports, because I believe that's a great thing.
But I think that it's better to be active or donate to a european group, actually, because more can be legally achieved in europe. It is rather useless to hope for any kind of animal welfare laws in america right now - the bush administration has zero interest in animal welfare - and therefore better to fight for improvement here in europe, I think. in austria, we have achieved quite a lot over the past years, seriously. battery cages will be illegal soon, supermarkets already do not sell those battery eggs anymore do to our actions and demos, fur farms are illegal, and we achieved that almost all big clothing stores no longer sell fur, and wild animals in circuses have also been outlawed, for example.
Worm
Taste the diffidence
As much as I appreciate most of their work, I agree with you.
The sad part about the animal rights campaigns is precisely that many of their arguments rest on slogans like "meat is murder". Very few people believe that, even people who love their pets, and that's not likely to change. Cows and chickens are fodder for the dinner plate. The masses will never believe "heifer cries could be human cries".
But there are strong arguments for vegeterianism which have nothing to do with extending human morality to animals. Two of the most compelling are, one, that vegetables are better for the human body than meat (assuming the diet contains a variety of foods that make up for the nutrients meat provides), and two, the amount of land required to clear for livestock grazing is destroying our forests (especially in South America) and an inefficient use of land anyway, as land used for growing crops instead of feeding animals would provide food for a much larger number of people. An additional reason would be the meat industry itself: regardless of the cruelty to the animals, fast food and a lot of other processed meats contain elements harmful to humans (see "Fast Food Nation" and, um, common sense).
Unfortunately none of these reasons is incredibly sexy in an ad campaign or a pop song. Until then the anti-cruelty groups must rely on as much drama as possible, which is why all their campaigns involve actors and pretty much go off the rails at some point or another. They do what they can, though, and I'm glad PETA is out there. If any of them break the law they should be punished, but they shouldn't be attacked as long as what they're doing is legal (or at least within the bounds of reasonable, if technically illegal protest-- i.e. civil disobedience).
I still say, why not just assume that everybody are intelligent enough to understand the ethical argument and stick to that. Everything else becomes irrelevant as soon as people realize that is is absurd to make a distinction between different life forms and saying that one has more of a right to live than the other.
We're the only life forms that recognize "rights" at all. Unless you're speaking from some religious perspective.
andy_fozzy
Banned
Poco Innocente
A ring a ding ding
no, i enjoy eating meat
Hunter Of Trolls
Troll Hunter
alma matters
New Member
I also support Animal Rescue Site, who's proceeds go towards feeding animals in shelters. It's a nice organization.
Danielledelu
girl least likely to
I joined, but soon after, I tried to do a petition but a lot of people would not sign, because they said all these things about PETA killing animals, I didn't know what to believe, i'm still a member of PETA, but not as active.
Similar threads
- Mr. So & So (Or The Silent Woman)
- General Discussion archive 2006 (read-only)
- BAN THE GRAND NATIONAL
- General Discussion archive 2006 (read-only)
- PISS ON HOLLYWOOD..WHAT A WASTE OF VALUABLE MONEY
- General Discussion archive 2006 (read-only)
