Posts tagged ‘peta’
The first time I saw this I thought it might be another
ad from those crazy kids over at PeTA.
…then I realized that they never put out anything nearly this well done.
Happy Politically Incorrect Solstice!
The brilliant minds at PeTA took another giant step toward irrelevance this week. Apparently having temporarily run out of fur coats to dump fake blood on and hot chicks to film in abstruse, sexually provocative ads — the group is now threatening NASCAR fans’ God-given right to dance.
Yes my friends, PeTA wants us to boycott the Chicken Dance at Talladega Superspeedway — an attempt to set a world record for the most people doing America’s Favorite Dance in one spot at the same time.
Thousands of people simultaneously doing the chicken dance at a NASCAR event – how utterly horrific.
Or maybe not…
Are Ingrid et al. incensed because the Chicken Dance represents a shallow, speciesist mockery of galline lifestyles? Is PeTA concerned that vibrations generated by thousands of waggling NASCAR butts will attract flocks of bait-seeking worm charmers to Talledega where they can make a killing harvesting hordes chicken dancing annelids? Are they worried that the hot, carbon-dioxide saturated exhalations of throngs of over-weight, out of shape, beer-guzzling fans will trigger a surge of polar ice melting? No – our friends over at PeTA are madder than wet hens because the Great Talledega Chicken Dance is sponsored by Kentucky Fried Chicken.
Now mind you, I’ m no fan of factory farmed chicken. Or of battery eggs. I’m just amused (and a bit pleased) to observe that these days it appears that the folks at PeTA seem to be capable of little more than mindless, incessant fishing for media attention. And the stunts they employ get more outrageous – and more pointless – by the day. Are they morphing into:
Pathetic Egomaniacs Targeting Anonymity?
I can hope…
The makers of Pedigree Dogs Exposed, the BBC documentary film that led to the BBC withdrawing from televising Crufts Dog Show in the UK are furious with PETA for jumping on the film’s bandwagon.
Earlier this week, PETA called for the US networks to stop televising Westminster Dog Show, citing the BBC film as evidence of unacceptable deformity and disease in pedigree dogs.
Pedigree Dogs Exposed was the result of two years’ careful research. The film highlighted serious health and welfare concerns in pedigree dogs that many experts agree need to be addressed urgently. However, the filmmakers have no connection to PETA and are idealogically opposed to PETA’s aims.
“I am horrified that PETA is using the film to further its own, warped agenda,” says Jemima Harrison, of Passionate Productions, which made the film for the BBC. “Our film is about animal welfare, not animal rights.
“PETA’s animal welfare record is appalling. It kills 97 per cent of the dogs that come to its shelters and admits its ultimate aim is to rid the world of what it calls the “domestic enslavement” of dogs as either pets or working dogs.
Because, of course, dying alone in the back of a van is so much better than life as a house pet.
Read the rest of Pat’s rant here and be sure to check out the links at the end his post.
The US Sportsman’s Alliance issued a press release today stating, in part:
Continuing their various marketing pitches, PETA is looking to actually approaching the U.S. government with a request to rent billboard advertising space on the border fence currently being built along the U.S.-Mexican border.
The billboards are already designed in English and Spanish, saying: “If the Border Patrol Doesn’t Get You, the Chicken and Burgers Will- Go Vegan.” The art on the signs would depict “fit and trim” Mexicans vs. obese Americans eating fast food.
As ponderously as the US Goverment and its border patrol may react at times – its nearly not as slow moving (or unfortunately so silent) a killer as coronary artery disease or hypertension. Does PeTA really think that the biggest threat posed to our neighbors south of the border is the potential for a high cholesterol, high sodium, high-fructose corn syrup fast food diet? And do they really think that people who are desperate enough to come here illegally care?
As Luisa of the excellent LassieGetHelp blog said so eloquently:
Because when you are an illiterate Mayan Indian from Guatemala and you have risked your life to escape the desperate poverty, the political corruption and the human rights atrocities in Central America and are finally within reach of the only hope of a better life that you will ever, ever have, the one thing guaranteed to make you want to turn around and walk all the way home is the prospect of being forced to subsist on Happy Meals for the rest of your life, since there are apparently no fruits, vegetables, beans or tortillas in the entire U. S. of A.
Hat tip to Sharon who alerted me to the July-August Edition of the Spaniel Journal, that features an article by Loretta Baughn titled “Setting Brush Fires.” The lead-in is this excellent quote from Samuel Adams:
“It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people’s minds.”
This country was founded by an irate, tireless minority who fought to earn freedom of religion, freedom of speech and to be free from the tyranny of taxation without representation – among other things.
Regrettably, the tireless minority that fights today is one that seeks to restrict – and even take away – many of our freedoms. As Ms. Baughan pointed out:
The phenomenon is not exclusive to Wisconsin. “Brush fires” are being set across the country in states, cities and towns – from sea to shining sea. The animal rights activists will point to a dog authorities might have confiscated in a raid of a sub-standard breeder with its fur all matted and dirty then scream the state has a “puppy mill” problem. I hate to see any animal needlessly suffer, but just by virtue that the authorities DID raid and confiscate dogs from a sub-standard breeder raising them in filth is PROOF that current laws work.
There are laws on the books regulating animal cruelty, livestock handling,animals in research, commercial breeding, pet waste, noise, zoning, limit laws – and more. Many of these laws could be improved, but when arrests occur, the media quick to jump on the animal rights bandwagon publicizing the plight of abused animals – but slow to the point of refusing – to report the fact that arrests can demonstrate that laws are working?
When a person is severly bitten by a dog, the incident spreads through the media like, well – like a brush fire. But the press never tells us when the dog involved in the incident was (as in most cases) an unlicensed, untrained dog with a previous history of aggression that was allowed, illegally – to run at large. The reports of most of the dog bite incidents published in local news over the last year noted that the dog had a previous history of aggression but they almost never went on to point out that the dog’s owner was therefore already breaking an existing law by putting the dog into the situation where the bite occured.
According to Minnesota State Law (Statutes 347.50-54) “Dangerous dog” means any dog that has:
(1) without provocation, inflicted substantial bodily harm on a human being on public or private property;
(2) killed a domestic animal without provocation while off the owner’s property; or
(3) been found to be potentially dangerous, and after the owner has notice that the dog is potentially dangerous, the dog aggressively bites, attacks, or endangers the safety of humans or domestic animals.
Among other requirements, the owner must register a dangerous dog with the state. He must obtain a $50,000 surety bond or liability insurance payable to any person injured by the dog. He must keep the dog in a secure enclosure with warning signs. When the dog is outside the enclosure it must be leashed, muzzled and under the physical restraint of a responsible person. Enforcing these restrictions would have prevented nearly every severe dog bite incident that occurred in this state in the last few years.
Yet the media (spurred on by a tireless, vocal minority of animal rights activists) continues to call for more laws instead of lobbying for better enforcement of existing laws; and members of the public, who have been conditioned to believe the media without question; agree to give up a little bit of their freedom to save babies from dogs bites and puppies from greedy millers.
Folks, we’re standing at the edge of a steep and terrifyingly slippery slope.
Vicious dog attacks. The plight of mill dogs. Dogs being euthanized or warehoused, in shelters. Dog poop in parks. Animal hoarders. Cruel people who torture dogs and other animals. Stories about these law breakers are being fed to the media directly from the spoon of the animal rights movement. The law breakers are portrayed as representing the norm, instead of the exception — and the story sells. Meanwhile, the thousands millions of stories that could be written about sweet-natured pitbulls, conscientious dog breeders, skilled dog trainers, caring rescue groups and responsible pet owners only rarely make the news.
The AR minority is trying to use lurid charges of animal abuse directed at the minority of farmers, hunters, fishermen, breeders and pet owners who break laws and commit cruel acts to end all use of animals in society. False and unsubstantiated allegations of animal abuse to raise funds are routinely used by these groups to attract media attention and amass support from naive, uninformed citizens who are led to believe that their donations will be used directly to save abandoned and abused animals.
Their true goal is not to help animals. HSUS doesn’t operate shelters and PETA kills nearly every animal they take in. The animal rights movement hurts us – and it hurts our pets. And it will keep doing so as long as citizens mindlessly swallow the AR media hype they’re fed and continue to contribute financial and tacit support to this cruel, tireless minority.
Apparently the folks over at DogFancy Magazine don’t bother to screen the content of ads submitted to their publication. This month’s issue includes an ad placed by PeTA that offers a “Free Gift Bag” for new puppy owners. Any new puppy owner foolish enough to call the number listed for the free offer will hear a message informing them that the “gift” is a body bag for the dog that they ‘killed’ by purchasing a purebred puppy.
Just when I begin to think that I’ve seen it all, the proslytizing idiots fools over at PeTA manage to find a way to drop to new lows. I wonder how many of the people who call are children, excited by a new pup?
For the record, I’m not a fan of Dog Fancy. As noted above, they don’t appeaer to make any effort to screen their ad content and some of the ads they carry promote operations that I believe are unethical. You know what I’m talking about, the kind of “send us credit card payment and we’ll ship a puppy to you, no questions asked” sort of operation that works so hard to masquerade as a reputable breeder.
Is this just a case of poor screening of ad content, or are the folks over at DogFancy simply out to make a buck at any cost? Based on the number of ads placed each month there by money-grubbing puppy mills questionable breeders and the fact that they accepted a full page ad from the H$U$ just last month — it sure looks like a case of pure, unadulterated greed.
A newsletter for the Southern California Alaskan Malamute Club carried a response from a staff member at Dog Fancy just after they posted the full page ad from HSUS. She stated:
Our department did not sell this ad it was our display department. We work with the breeders not businesses. I’m so sorry I can see why you and others are upset. I am going to do what I can so this does not happen again.
Apparently the clueless dolts nice people over at Dog Fancy had no idea that PeTA and HSUS are in the business of eliminating pet ownership. Perhaps if they spent just a bit of time researching important issues like breed specific legislation, mandatory spay/neuter laws, pet limits and other pet-related legislation – they’d understand just how much it hurts them when they provide a public relations platform to AR groups.
If you’d like to contact Dog Fancy Magazine to express your opinion, here’s the information:
You can post comments to Dog Fancy online here:
Or contact Constance Dang in the editorial department directly:
UPDATED July 18:
Here’s MORE contact information.
(866) 834-6061 is the phone number you are supposed to call to leave the address for PeTA to send your body bag, but you could choose to leave a message there instead — perhaps letting them know how you feel about their campaign. Why don’t we heat up that line a bit?