HOME | DD
oracle19 β PeTA: Terrorism and Hypocrisy
Published: 2006-10-04 04:08:46 +0000 UTC; Views: 2324; Favourites: 9; Downloads: 9
Redirect to original
Description
PeTA member Pamela Anderson sporting the milk mustache of hypocrisyRelated content
Comments: 33
If Obama knew better, he'd have PETA destroyed. I hope he does
π: 0 β©: 0
Hey look! Its a whore-no wait thats Pamela Anderson......
WHATS THE DIFFERENCE???? 
π: 0 β©: 0
peta kills animals all the time its really the norm people like peta because of what it says its ideals are when they have no idea what peta really does it just sounds nice fuck peta
π: 0 β©: 0
Notice most Peta supporters are anorexic looking porn stars with fake tits? And don't forget the "I'd rather be anorexic than eat anything that comes from an animal" campaign. I'd would rather perfer a woman with some meat on her than those skeletal twigs.
π: 0 β©: 1
but when that meat on your woman comes at the price of the torture and death of animals, that's when that slogan comes in.
π: 0 β©: 0
why just KFC ..what about Macdonalds , Murder King ,Killer ,in the Box , Eat n Out , ETC etc etc etc blabla bla Peta sucks fight every body o just KFC , look like its just political bullsh-it ,,,,
sorry about my english ...
π: 0 β©: 1
They are focusing so much on KFC because this chain is supplied by factories that treat their livestock terribly.
It may be that the other foodchains are not,
and also that KFC is all about chicken, while the other places have many other items on their menu, including vegetarian ones.
π: 0 β©: 1
thx. i dont know that ...
π: 0 β©: 0
Can't blame her: there's more plastic on her than meat.
π: 0 β©: 0
I find your ideas intriguing, and wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
π: 0 β©: 0
βOur nonviolent tactics are not as effective. We ask nicely for years and get nothing. Someone makes a threat, and it works.β - Ingrid Newkirk, PETA President and Co-Founder.
Hold on, let me crack open the American Heritage Dictionary:
ter-ror-ism : (tΔr'Ι-rΔz'Ιm) noun The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.
π: 0 β©: 1
Well, then I guess all governments, religions, and organizations are terrorists. And all parents who threaten their children are terrorists, and children who threaten other children, etc., etc., etc.
Face it, the word "terrorist" is nothing but a meaningless political jab. People only use the word for the same reason they watch mainstream media: they prefer flaky emotional reactions to throught processes.
If people are committing the crime of slavery, I fully support an organization that tries to "terrorize" people into waking up and dealing with the injustice. The same goes for animal abuse/exploitation.
There have been ZERO people injured and/or killed by animal groups, including ALF. So who really has the blood on their hands, Peta or the Center for Consumer Freedom (the people spreading these nasty lies about Peta)?? And the Center for Consumer Freedom is, by the way, funded directly by Phillip Morris, an organization responsible for so many deaths it would be hard to calculate them all.
So at the very least try to put a little perspective on things when you call an animal rights organization "terrorist."
π: 0 β©: 2
Face it, the word "terrorist" is nothing but a meaningless political jab. People only use the word for the same reason they watch mainstream media: they prefer flaky emotional reactions to throught processes.
Tell that to your average New Yorker, and let me know their reaction. I'm sorry, but if you burn a building, you're not exactly an angel. If you use arson to instill terror (as the name suggests,) you're a terrorist, no matter the intention. By proxy, if you support and especially fund arsonists with the intention to instill terror, you support terrorism. ("I will be the last person to condemn the ALF." Ingrid Newkirk)
So the $90 million worth of arsons didn't kill anyone. I feel so much better. 
On the CCF being funded by Philip Morris, I don't quite see the connection. Isn't that kinda like saying that since the highway system was developed by Nazis, it was bad? If the CCF was lying, were BBC, MSNBC, and PETA's own tax records in on the lies?
Kinda odd, too, since I criticized PETA, you automatically assumed that I supported the CCF. Adorable little one-track mind! Seriously, you're talking to a SPCA volunteer.
Oh yea, and what about those raids on labs and farms where the heroic ALF dives in and sets the creatures free? It would kinda help if the animals actually learned to live in the wild, so they don't find themselves as coyote poop in a week. Not as no-kill as we all thought.
π: 0 β©: 1
Tell that to your average New Yorker, and let me know their reaction.
LOL. Oh, my poor heartstrings. Please relent!
I'll say it again: 'terrorist' has become a meaningless term because of idiots that apply it to anyone they disagree with.
On the CCF being funded by Philip Morris, I don't quite see the connection. Isn't that kinda like saying that since the highway system was developed by Nazis, it was bad? If the CCF was lying, were BBC, MSNBC, and PETA's own tax records in on the lies?
Kinda odd, too, since I criticized PETA, you automatically assumed that I supported the CCF. Adorable little one-track mind! Seriously, you're talking to a SPCA volunteer.
I don't even know what you're yammering about. That comment wasn't an attack on you, it was a statement in general to people who parrot the empty accusation that PETA are terrorists. Not everything is about you.
The CCF, the people on the front of the attack against PETA (an organization that has never harmed a person), are funded by a company whose product has consciously killed millions upon millions of people, and continues to do so right now as I'm typing. That, to me, is ironic. If you don't get it, sorry, but I've put it in pretty simple terms.
So the $90 million worth of arsons didn't kill anyone. I feel so much better.
It's a shame you're being sarcastic. Does that mean you put property value ahead of animal lives? I don't, personally. It's a shame that it's only 90 million though (assuming you're right). If it was in the billions, I'd be much happier.
[blah blah blah]... find themselves as coyote poop in a week.
I'd rather be coyote poop tomorrow than live my entire life in a cage that was slightly larger than me and then have medical tests done on me against my will which usually kill me.
π: 0 β©: 1
I'll say it again: 'terrorist' has become a meaningless term because of idiots that apply it to anyone they disagree with.
Granted (Goldwin's Law.) But that doesn't negate the fact that terrorism is a very real and very dangerous. And you have yet to explain to me how arson isn't terrorism.
On the CCF: money knows no good nor evil. Again, the Nazis also killed millions upon millions of people AND animals. By your logic, the Autobahn should have been long torn down, because of the origins of its funding.
"A rat is a pig is a dog is a boy." - Ingrid Newkirk
If you believe that statement, animal equals person.
"Did we euthanize some animals who could have been adopted? Maybe." - Daphna Nachminovitch
If you STILL believe Newkirk's claim, you cannot say PETA has never harmed a person.
Even if you don't believe that, Fran Stephanie Truitt, Josh Harper, and Bryan Pease, all PETA, have been convicted for physical assault (FST for attempted murder.)
π: 0 β©: 1
And you have yet to explain to me how arson isn't terrorism.
Erm, because inanimate objects can't be frightened. 
"Did we euthanize some animals who could have been adopted? Maybe." - Daphna Nachminovitch
Well, I really don't know what the context of that statement is, but I support euthanasia, and also believe humans should have the right to it themselves. But that seems like a different subject.
Even if you don't believe that, Fran Stephanie Truitt, Josh Harper, and Bryan Pease, all PETA, have been convicted for physical assault (FST for attempted murder.)
Well, I wouldn't be out of it enough to suggest that every single person involved in a large organization is perfect. I doubt there's an organization--or even a group of three people or more--on the planet without a skeleton in the closet somewhere.
NASA isn't an organization of crack-pot murderers just because Lisa Nowak had a mental breakdown.
π: 0 β©: 1
Okay, you've proven your point. Give me your address, and I'll torch your house, just to prove I'm right. Don't worry; I'll warn you well in advance, and give you plenty of time to get yourself to safety, so only your property gets burned. It's win-win!
Seriously, someone who burns their bar for insurance money is in a completely different context. It's his own property, and the motive is insurance fraud, not terrorism.
R. Coronado burning a lab at a university, to instill a sense of terror, is terrorism.
The context of the euthanasia statement is that, if you believe animals are the same a humans, then euthanizing an animal is the same as euthanizing a human. Would you give a human a potassium shot against his will, especially if he is still useful or "adoptable?"
You are correct: NASA isn't a bunch of crackpot murderers, and I'm sure not everyone at PETA is like the three I mentioned. However, unlike PETA, NASA doesn't support or fund people like Nowak or William Philips (proof: Nowak was fired. Pease is a PETA spokesperson.)
π: 0 β©: 1
If I was torturing sentient organisms, you'd have every right to burn down my house. That is my position. And if you torture sentient organisms, and no one seems to be doing anything about it, I will pay heroic people who risk their lives to burn down your house. And if you are terrified, good! Your emotional comfort (complacency?) is not worth the life of another person or animal. According to your reasoning, people who operated the Underground Railroad were terrorists because they were damaging/stealing property and instilling fear and anger in thier poor, helpless "victims."
The context of the euthanasia statement is that, if you believe animals are the same a humans, then euthanizing an animal is the same as euthanizing a human. Would you give a human a potassium shot against his will, especially if he is still useful or "adoptable?"
This is wildly oversimplifying things. If one of my friends was dying a horrible death, and was for some reason incapable of understanding that he was going to die, yes, I would probably euthanize him. I can only hope that my friends would have the same good sense when dealing with me.
What do you mean by "useful" anyway??
π: 0 β©: 0
Do you know what else requires animal products?
The steel industry uses great quantities of animal fat... that means say goodbye to stable buildings, and cars, and many other things. There's steel in your computer. Animal skin and bones are boiled to render collagen that's used in gelatin. So, no Jell-O for you. The same gelatin is also used in camera film, so I guess you can't take pictures either, but PeTA doesn't seem shy about using huge quantities of film to make their propaganda, and using computers to upload it all
π: 0 β©: 1
"The steel industry uses great quantities of animal fat"
Please cite that.
"So, no Jell-O for you."
Yes, I know. That was without a doubt the easiest thing to give up when I first turned vegetarian, and on my countless attempts at turning fully vegan. If there is a food that is more disgusting and tasteless than Jell-O, I've sure never heard of it.
"used in camera film"
Ever hear of a digital camera??
π: 0 β©: 1
"Tallow is used in the steel rolling industry to provide the required lubrication as the sheet steel is compressed through the rollers." from Wikipedia
"The tallow oil purchased by BlueScope Steel for use as a rolling lubricant is itself a recycled product of the fast food industry" from [link]
π: 0 β©: 1
"Tallow is used in the steel rolling industry to provide the required lubrication as the sheet steel is compressed through the rollers. There is a trend towards replacing tallow based lubrication with synthetic oils in rolling applications for surface cleanliness reasons.[2]"
Er, I don't mean to sound rude... but didn't you read the second sentence on wikipedia?? Maybe I'm not following what point you're trying to make.
π: 0 β©: 0
Terrorism? Give me a break... all you have to do is jaywalk in this country anymore to be labeled a "terrorist" by some libertarian nutjob.
π: 0 β©: 1
I assure you, if PeTA were an organization of jaywalkers instead of a bunch of loons who would kill a human being if even loosely perceived a threat to animal rights, PeTA would not be on my radar.
First off, how is attacking people who decide to wear fur not terrorism? I don't know how broadly you define it, but I consider trivializing the safety of any human being for a "cause" within the realistic definition of terrorism.
Secondly, it's creepy that an "animal rights group" supports the euthanization of animals who are simply "unwanted".
Face it, PeTA is full of hypocrites and terrorist nutjobs, and thankfully there are animal rights groups who are onto the fact that PeTA is full of terrorists and hypocrites. PeTA's tactics are unacceptable in a truly humanitarian society, whether or not you or anyone else wants to step up and admit it.
π: 0 β©: 0
Haha! Nice one.
You she was in the news recently? Apparently, she was mad because the governor of Kentucky wouldn't abide by PETA's request that he remove a statue of Colonel Sanders from the state capitol (I think it was the state capitol, but I'm not sure) and held a big protest about it.
Would the "good" people at PETA please kindly stop being such morons?
π: 0 β©: 1
Haha
I'd have told her to forget her troubles with a nice, big bucket of Original Recipe.
π: 0 β©: 2
You've received a DevArtClub fave for hitting a controversial nerve
π: 0 β©: 0