All the protests about animal rights and abuse and PETA runs a slaughterhouse of their own.  The logic and twisted thinking of groups like this is just beyond comprehension.  Sickening.  Some years ago they were caught euthanizing hundreds of animals collected from shelters, vet clinics and pounds and dumping the carcasses in dumpsters and when it was brought to light nothing was done and they continued to kill healthy animals.  Some of these animals were euthanised the same day they were picked up off the street which is against ASPCA protocall.

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

-P.

Just wonderful isn't it?  Read some of the links, however, be advised that some of them just might make you ill.  Believe it or not, we had similar problems here with a *no kill* shelter~they were euthanizing animals, but presenting a different face to the public.

Yank their damned tax exempt status.  That ought to solve the problem.

Carolyn

i think we should call alligators swamp kittens ::)

Such a post would have more credibility if you linked to a Scientology site.

Criticism

The CCF has drawn harsh criticism for having taken its startup funding from the Philip Morris tobacco company and for lobbying on behalf of the fast food, meat, and tobacco industries while representing consumers.[36][2][37][38][39]

Some groups the CCF has targeted have questioned its ethics and legitimacy. The president of the American Federation of Teachers referred to the CCF's leader as "a shameless lobbyist who has shilled for pesticide, alcohol and tobacco companies." [24] It has also been criticized for its efforts to portray groups such as the Humane Society of the United States as "violent" and "extreme," and for its opposition to banning the use of trans fats.[40][41][42][43][44] The group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington has also campaigned against the CCF's validity as a non-profit tax exempt charitable organization, filing an IRS complaint in 2004 attacking the CCF's claims that its advocacy campaigns were "educational" in nature.[45][46][2]

Some corporations, including PepsiCo and Kraft Foods, have declined to work with the CCF, saying they disagree with some of the group's arguments or with its approach to advocacy.[31]

Following a CCF call for a retraction of a New York Times story about mercury levels in sushi as “bad science,” Newsweek senior editor Sharon Begley has criticized the CCF's interpretation of EPA statistics and implications of FDA restrictions on tuna and other fish.[47]

Lobster wrote on Mar 30^th, 2009 at 11:08am:

Such a post would have more credibility if you linked to a Scientology site. Criticism The CCF has drawn harsh criticism for having taken its startup funding from the Philip Morris tobacco company and for lobbying on behalf of the fast food, meat, and tobacco industries while representing consumers.[36][2][37][38][39] Some groups the CCF has targeted have questioned its ethics and legitimacy. The president of the American Federation of Teachers referred to the CCF's leader as "a shameless lobbyist who has shilled for pesticide, alcohol and tobacco companies." [24] It has also been criticized for its efforts to portray groups such as the Humane Society of the United States as "violent" and "extreme," and for its opposition to banning the use of trans fats.[40][41][42][43][44] The group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington has also campaigned against the CCF's validity as a non-profit tax exempt charitable organization, filing an IRS complaint in 2004 attacking the CCF's claims that its advocacy campaigns were "educational" in nature.[45][46][2] Some corporations, including PepsiCo and Kraft Foods, have declined to work with the CCF, saying they disagree with some of the group's arguments or with its approach to advocacy.[31] Following a CCF call for a retraction of a New York Times story about mercury levels in sushi as “bad science,” Newsweek senior editor Sharon Begley has criticized the CCF's interpretation of EPA statistics and implications of FDA restrictions on tuna and other fish.[47]

thats interesting. everybody has an agenda. media is getting less and less credible.

they are f##@%$#ing animals!!!!!!  NOT KIDS! give it a break! If all those little puppies and kitty cats were running loose in your tidy little subdivision, you would bitch at that. Whats your point??? that PETA is screwed up? NO SHIT. Does that surprise you?????  Just remember, its the cash from hunting fees and permits that has done more for animals in this country than ANYTHING else!!!!  

Lobster wrote on Mar 30^th, 2009 at 11:08am:

Such a post would have more credibility if you linked to a Scientology site. Criticism The CCF has drawn harsh criticism for having taken its startup funding from the Philip Morris tobacco company and for lobbying on behalf of the fast food, meat, and tobacco industries while representing consumers.[36][2][37][38][39] Some groups the CCF has targeted have questioned its ethics and legitimacy. The president of the American Federation of Teachers referred to the CCF's leader as "a shameless lobbyist who has shilled for pesticide, alcohol and tobacco companies." [24] It has also been criticized for its efforts to portray groups such as the Humane Society of the United States as "violent" and "extreme," and for its opposition to banning the use of trans fats.[40][41][42][43][44] The group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington has also campaigned against the CCF's validity as a non-profit tax exempt charitable organization, filing an IRS complaint in 2004 attacking the CCF's claims that its advocacy campaigns were "educational" in nature.[45][46][2] Some corporations, including PepsiCo and Kraft Foods, have declined to work with the CCF, saying they disagree with some of the group's arguments or with its approach to advocacy.[31] Following a CCF call for a retraction of a New York Times story about mercury levels in sushi as “bad science,” Newsweek senior editor Sharon Begley has criticized the CCF's interpretation of EPA statistics and implications of FDA restrictions on tuna and other fish.[47]

Makes no difference who printed the statistics because the ORIGIONAL source for the statistics on the kill rate came from  PETA's own documents.

-P.

tuck wrote on Mar 30^th, 2009 at 11:18am:

they are f##@%$#ing animals!!!!!!  NOT KIDS! give it a break! If all those little puppies and kitty cats were running loose in your tidy little subdivision, you would bitch at that. Whats your point??? that PETA is screwed up? NO SHIT. Does that surprise you?????  Just remember, its the cash from hunting fees and permits that has done more for animals in this country than ANYTHING else!!!!

Tuck you are referring to the Pittman-Robinson Act of 1937 and yes I am quite familliar with it.  My point was the hypocracy with which PETA operates.  They claim to be pro animal but they in fact have a higher kill ratio than ANY other organization on earth.  That aside, how would like your dog or pet to be picked up and put down within 24 hours just because it got loose?  Perhaps you don't have any pets.  

I am by no means a tree hugging bunnyman but slaughter of non game animals for zelous political viewpoint is pretty fucked up and PETA is given a free pass most of the time.  I'd say have a canned hunt on a PETA preserve.  The hunter with the most PETA members tied to  his hood wins.    ;)

-P.

-P.

LMFAO,, sign me up!

tuck wrote on Mar 30^th, 2009 at 11:18am:

they are f##@%$#ing animals!!!!!!  NOT KIDS! give it a break! If all those little puppies and kitty cats were running loose in your tidy little subdivision, you would bitch at that. Whats your point??? that PETA is screwed up? NO SHIT. Does that surprise you?????  Just remember, its the cash from hunting fees and permits that has done more for animals in this country than ANYTHING else!!!!

good point. i don't believe in cruelty to animals but peta is just goofy.

Acutally, I can't see where Tuck made a good point at all.  The original post was decrying the *falseness* of PETAs' stance about animals,  Euthanizing that many animals is not People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.  It's misleading to the public at large.  Kind of like my bosses daughter who is a vegan because she doesn't like the way farm animals are treated, yet she wears leather shoes and carries leather purses.

deltadarlin wrote on Mar 30^th, 2009 at 5:44pm:

Kind of like my bosses daughter who is a vegan because she doesn't like the way farm animals are treated, yet she wears leather shoes and carries leather purses.

Then she's not a vegan. She may be a vegetarian, but she's no vegan.

deltadarlin wrote on Mar 30^th, 2009 at 5:44pm:

Acutally, I can't see where Tuck made a good point at all.  The original post was decrying the *falseness* of PETAs' stance about animals,  Euthanizing that many animals is not People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.  It's misleading to the public at large.  Kind of like my bosses daughter who is a vegan because she doesn't like the way farm animals are treated, yet she wears leather shoes and carries leather purses.

so peta isn't really running a slaughter house?