Print Story On the subject of PETA.
Diary
By nightflameblue (Fri Apr 10, 2009 at 10:09:24 AM EST) (all tags)

Yes, I know they suck. Yes, I know I should ignore them. But there's times where their absurdity climbs to such levels that I just can't let it be.

Case in point. . . .



Seriously? OK, in all honesty, that's par for the course for these hosebags, but the truth is, what got under my skin was an article linked to off a discussion of this article, which I read more for interest in the Pet Shop boys than in PETA.

This article, to be precise.

Who the fuck do these cocksuckers think they are? Actively pursuing "animal rescue" and then claiming they aren't an "adoption agency" therefore they have no responsibility to place the animals in proper homes makes me want to start gankin' bitches.

What type of rescue is that?

I'm trying to figure out exactly what it is PETA hopes to accomplish. I've often wondered if they aren't a counter-unit of some animal haters club or something trying to make all actual animal rights people seem insane. But this little move takes it to a whole new level of suck.

As someone who actually cares about animals, PETA makes my skin crawl. This is just one more thing on the list as far as I'm concerned.

Rage.

Enough.

< I blame Rufus for making me sleep under the wet spot | I feel like I've been run over by a truck. >
On the subject of PETA. | 19 comments (19 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback
People Eating Tasty Animals by wiredog (2.00 / 0) #1 Fri Apr 10, 2009 at 10:23:55 AM EST


Earth First!
(We can strip mine the rest later.)

People for the Unethical Treatment of Animals by Herring (2.00 / 0) #2 Fri Apr 10, 2009 at 10:41:57 AM EST
Can't see a problem with that acronym.

christ, we're all old now - StackyMcRacky
[ Parent ]
Unless you speak Spanish (N/T) by theboz (4.00 / 1) #15 Fri Apr 10, 2009 at 05:02:19 PM EST
No Text

- - - - -
That's what I always say about you, boz, you have a good memory for random facts about pussy. -- joh3n
[ Parent ]
I like the first comment to the article by gpig (2.00 / 0) #3 Fri Apr 10, 2009 at 11:27:11 AM EST
'We need to start a group called "Meat Eaters Against Killing Animals" to combat this hypocrisy!'

http://www.mndaily.com/2009/04/01/peta-kills-pets-they-purport-save#comment-10084
---
(,   ,') -- eep

The whole thread is entertainment on a stick. by nightflameblue (2.00 / 0) #4 Fri Apr 10, 2009 at 11:30:23 AM EST
The whole terrorist ties/meat eaters group bashing/restaurant bashing it's all funny.

[ Parent ]
Funny, but kind of sad at the same time by gpig (2.00 / 0) #8 Fri Apr 10, 2009 at 12:08:52 PM EST
PETA, who seem to want us to care much more for animals than for people.

The anti-PETA, who seem to be happy for an animal to suffer as long as it's not a dog or cat.

Both sides are wrong.
---
(,   ,') -- eep

[ Parent ]
Yep. by nightflameblue (4.00 / 1) #9 Fri Apr 10, 2009 at 12:26:38 PM EST
Full agreement. Still, point and laugh is enacted for both sides.

[ Parent ]
PETA idiots by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #5 Fri Apr 10, 2009 at 11:44:10 AM EST
My favorite bit is that they have now started protesting video games.  They apparently think it is appalling that a player in a WWII shooter may shoot the odd nazi attack dog while he is mowing down stormtroopers.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
isn't that the purpose by bobdole (2.00 / 0) #19 Sun Apr 12, 2009 at 10:04:29 AM EST
of special interest groups.

There are other groups that deal with the mowing of stormtroopers, Peta deals with animals. No idiocy in having a defined (and "narrow") scope.

On the other hand, I think they are complete muppets, well PR-wise they seem to be causing themselves more harm than good.

-- The revolution will not be televised.
[ Parent ]
The article's stats are deceptive. by Beechwood 45789 (2.00 / 0) #6 Fri Apr 10, 2009 at 11:54:21 AM EST
According to VADACS records, in 2008 PETA "took" in 10,014 animals. Of those animals, only 27 were strays.

Of those 10,014 animals, 4 were dead on arrival (1 dog, 2 cats, and 1 guinea pig). So, really, we're only talking about 10,010 animals.

Of the 10,010 in PETA's care, 7,525 were reclaimed by their owners. 59 were adopted by new owners. 42 were transfered to other care facilities. At the end of the year, 17 animals were living in PETA care facilities.

All told 2,369 animals (this includes two stray chickens, 243 unspecified species of rodents, and 155 animals that arrived critically wounded) were euthanized.

This means that means a little over 23% of the animals PETA takes in get euthanized. The vast majority are returned to their owners, adopted, or moved to other care facilities.

The reportage for that piece seems to have been taken from a press release from the Center for Consumer Freedom. The CCF is a lobby organization for food producers and their site also promises to blow the lid off the Humane Society and Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine. When those groups have been thoroughly debunked, the CCF offers a wide range of articles on how "vegetarianism doesn’t just carry risks for physical health – in the case of teenagers, it can be evidence of an eating disorder"; how "Sierra Club has become an anti-growth, anti-technology group that puts its utopian environmentalist vision before the well being of humans"; and how "self-appointed diet dictators" are seeking "extra taxes on foods they don't like." It's all pretty informative.

Indeed by gpig (4.00 / 1) #7 Fri Apr 10, 2009 at 12:04:40 PM EST
On reading the argument, I assumed that at least some of the euthanised animals were killed simply because of the condition they were in when they were rescued. The same is true for any animal shelter or *SPCA.

On the other hand, PETA are fucking nutters.

Neither side in this comes out looking particularly rational or sensible.
---
(,   ,') -- eep

[ Parent ]
Lots of fruitcakes out there. by nightflameblue (2.00 / 0) #10 Fri Apr 10, 2009 at 12:28:42 PM EST
On all sides.

Doesn't change the fact they hit my PETA alert buttons.



[ Parent ]
a modest proposal by clover kicker (2.00 / 0) #12 Fri Apr 10, 2009 at 02:17:47 PM EST
We simply need to organize a cage match of wingnuts, to settle the matter once and for all.

[ Parent ]
I'd like to. by nightflameblue (2.00 / 0) #14 Fri Apr 10, 2009 at 02:39:00 PM EST

But the last time I tried that the steel supporters got in a bitch fight outside the ring with the plastic supporters and they ended up spending the entire time screaming at each other about ruining the world. None of them manned up and pulled the chair routine on each other. It was boring.



[ Parent ]
Hey now. by dark nowhere (2.00 / 0) #17 Sat Apr 11, 2009 at 03:19:33 AM EST
That euphemism is traditionally used to introduce a comically inappropriate for its sheer inappropriateness but technically effective solution. Yours is completely the other way around; the world always produces, like babies, more wingnuts.

On the bright side, world hunger shouldn't be an issue now that I think of it.

Chill out, snowflake.

[ Parent ]
Got netflix? by vorheesleatherface (2.00 / 0) #11 Fri Apr 10, 2009 at 12:55:59 PM EST
Check out the episode of Penn and Tellers Bullshit where they examine animal rights groups. Hell, check out the entire series.


I haven't seen one of those shows in ages. by nightflameblue (4.00 / 1) #13 Fri Apr 10, 2009 at 02:37:47 PM EST

I should really do that.

[ Parent ]
bullshit by garlic (4.00 / 1) #18 Sun Apr 12, 2009 at 12:11:58 AM EST
is an appropriate title for what the penn and teller show was producing.


[ Parent ]
They're want any sort of attention by ShadowNode (4.00 / 1) #16 Fri Apr 10, 2009 at 07:36:48 PM EST
They don't care how you react, only that you do.

YHBT. HTH. HAND.


On the subject of PETA. | 19 comments (19 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback