Posts tagged ‘peta’

Hunting For The Spirit of Christmas

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!

December 21, 2009 at 12:38 am 1 comment

PETA and The “Other White Meat”

From The Onion via The Poodle and Dog Blog

Rumor has it that they’re also planning to exploit bed bugs in two new campaigns.

August 16, 2009 at 1:14 am 1 comment

PeTA Pecks at Chicken Dance

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…

April 22, 2009 at 3:35 pm Leave a comment

Pedigree Dogs Don’t Want PETA’s Support

And neither does Jemima Harrison, producer of the documentary Pedigree Dogs Exposed. Hat tip to Pat the Terrierman who wrote an excellent post with quotes from Ms. Harrison and

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.

January 9, 2009 at 6:02 pm 1 comment

Is PeTa Running For the Border?

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.


August 20, 2008 at 12:17 am 3 comments

A Tireless Minority

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.

July 22, 2008 at 1:26 am 5 comments

Free Body Bag With Puppy Purchase!

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:
(800) 530-3010

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?

July 16, 2008 at 8:34 pm 6 comments

Pythons Brutally Hacked!

Or not…. 


Thanks to TechFaux for this amusing bit of satirical social commentary that pokes fun at PeTA and nerds.

June 23, 2008 at 2:35 pm 4 comments

Out of the Frying Pan…

People living in Helena-West Helena, Arkansas are upset – they say their community has gone to the dogs – and the mayor is to blame!

From USA Today:

LITTLE ROCK (AP) — Unable and unwilling to keep abandoned dogs in a dilapidated shelter, the city of Helena-West Helena is taking strays to a national forest and leaving them on the side of the road.

“They are better off free,” Mayor James Valley said Thursday. “Pardon the pun, but it was just something that was dogging us. So it would be easier for us until we get a facility and have a plan that we just not be in the animal shelter business.”

Excuse me, the major actually admitted that he believes that abandoning dogs by the side of the road in a rural area is a viable solution to shelter overcrowding?  Is this solution about what’s good for the dogs or is it really about a simple and inexpensive solution for the city?

Fortunately, not everyone in Arkansas agrees with the mayor:

But the St. Francis National Forest isn’t in the animal shelter business, either.  “In the code, it is illegal to release animals, livestock or abandoned personal property on national forest land,” spokeswoman Tracy Farley said.

Uh, yeah.  And probably illegal too.  Don’t they have animal cruelty laws in Helena-West Helena?

Valley said the city’s animal shelter was so run down that a regional humane society worker cut its locks last winter and released all the dogs. The city then temporarily moved its shelter to four uncovered pens at the city sanitation department.

After people complained the animals were still not properly cared for, the mayor decided the animals would be better off in the forest. The city street director on Wednesday took about 10 dogs to the forest after feeding and watering them. About three dogs were kept to be put down by a veterinarian, Valley said.

So, mayor apparently feels that a history of negligence on the part of the city absolves them of the need to properly maintain animals in their care.  And – there’s more:

“We have a leash law that we’ve been trying to work our way into enforcing. It’s been so lax,” the mayor said. “People are not buying leashes or tags for the animals. We could literally pick up every other dog in the city.”

{shaking my head in complete and utter consternation…} 
Wait – the city couldn’t maintain the shelter they had, they are so ill-prepared to care for the dogs now in custody that they’re illegally setting them ‘free’ in the woods — and now they want to increase the number of dogs they’re abusing confiscating?

Eyewitnessnews reports interviewed local resident Shirley Blair.  Blair lives near the forest where the dogs were released.  She thinks the plan is crazy too.

“I think it’s ridiculous.  We’re not pleased with the decision to turn them loose out here.”  Shirley Blair says just one day after the dogs were released, six of them showed up in her yard growling.  “We headed to the mailbox and he (grandson, Parker) ran towards the house crying.  One of them looked ill on the driveway, bleeding, bacteria, we don’t need that here.”

And… it gets better (or is that worse…?)  From WREG Memphis:

The national offices of the Humane Society Of America and PETA are stepping into this situation according to Gloria Higginbotham of the Humane Society Of The Delta.

These poor dogs may end up going from the frying pan into the fire.  If the dogs the mayor so moronically magnanimously ‘set free’ are unlucky enough to be captured and turned over to PETA — they will likely all be killed.  PETA’s own records state that the group killed more than 90% of the animals they took in in 2007.

But hey, that’s better than letting them be unlicensed and off leash.

June 15, 2008 at 8:00 pm 3 comments

Hunters 1 – HSUS 0

This just in from the United States Sportsmen’s Alliance:

The leadership at Meijer, a Michigan-based regional chain of retail superstores, has responded to the concerns of the sportsman community and ended its partnership with the anti-hunting group, the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), in an online pet photo contest.

Meijer initially refused a U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance (USSA) request to abandon the partnership, which according to information on the Meijer website, called for the company to donate $1 for each person that entered the contest, up to a maximum of $5,000, to the HSUS Foreclosure Pets Fund.

On Friday, April 25, the USSA sent out a call to action for sportsmen to voice their concerns over these donations to the biggest anti-hunting organization in the world.  Sportsmen immediately took action, flooding the retailer with phone calls, faxes and emails. 

Thanks to this action by sportsmen, Meijer has now eliminated the portion of the contest that included a donation to HSUS.

“Our program was an outgrowth of our history of supporting local humane societies.  We were not aware of the concerns that exist among hunters about HSUS.  As you know, we have strongly supported the hunting community over many decades,” said Meijer vice president of corporate communications and public affairs, Stacie Behler.  “We have discontinued our donation program as a result of the feedback.  No new funds will be collected.  The funds that were collected will be used exclusively for their Foreclosure Pets Fund, which is a grants program for animal shelters, non-sheltered rescue/adoption groups and animal care and control agencies to establish, expand, or publicize services or programs that assist families caring for their pets during the current economic crisis.”

Kudos to USSA for their work.  HSUS recently lobbied against dove hunting in my home state of Minnesota.  In a nice bit of editorial work Tori McCormick of my local paper, the Republican Eagle, noted that:

I’m not one to cry foul when an anti-hunting group fires one of its patented rhetorical bombs about the cruelty of hunting and how it isn’t justified in modern-day society.

 If I did, I’d have to spend every waking hour trying to set the record straight.

 Our nation was founded on the broad shoulders of free speech, and I strongly believe that everyone has the right to express their opinion, whether I agree with it or not.

After that insightful little volley where she acknowledges their right to free speech (but not to spew volumes of inane propaganda) she follows up with:

Fact is, hunters waste too much energy worrying about the antis when we should be firing back in their face a simple question: What have you done for wildlife and wildlife habitat? Nothing, that’s what. At least nothing meaningful.

When’s the last time they’ve fought for wetlands protections, healthy forests, farm bill conservation programs, sustainable fisheries and other land and water stewardship initiatives?

The anti-hunting movement has been AWOL, while hunters and anglers, historically and today, have been on the front lines slugging it out.

But when an anti-hunting group wages an anti-hunting campaign based on misinformation, lies and propaganda, a campaign whose ends would comprise conservation and science-based wildlife management, I believe the public record must be corrected.

Amen sister.  While the whiney losers at HSUS and PeTA sit around on their fat, donation-supported asses accomplishing nothing more than spewing lies and promoting bad laws; groups like Ducks UnlimitedPheasants Forever, the National Wild Turkey FoundationQuail Unlimited, the Ruffed Grouse Society, Trout Unlimited, the Masters of Foxhounds Association of North America, and the Sierra Club support hunting AND work actively to conserve wild lands.

So, if habitat conservation and the preservation of wildlife are really important to you…. where should YOU donate?

April 30, 2008 at 6:03 am 2 comments

Older Posts

Because A Dog’s Mind is a Terrible Thing to Waste


Copyright notice

All original content on this Web site is copyright © on the date of publication by this author. All rights reserved except, of course, that others may quote from original content under the 'Fair Use' provisions of US copyright law.

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 284 other subscribers

RSS New Stuff in our Library

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

Top Clicks

  • None
Top Dog Blog
Featured in Alltop


Add to Technorati Favorites
Dog Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
blogarama - the blog directory
Blog Directory
Blog Directory & Search engine
March 2023