Author’s New Cookbook Aims to Satirize Animal Rights Groups with Recipes Using Household Pets

In PEOPLE EATING TASTY ANIMALS, author Robert Arlen uses black humor to create a recipe book meant to shock and amuse.

VIRGINIA BEACH, VA - In PEOPLE EATING TASTY ANIMALS, Robert Arlen takes on what he feels is one animal rights group's over-the-top stance on animal rights by producing a cookbook for meals made from whales, poodles and more. Author Robert Arlen is an animal lover who has also owned two different pet stores. Yet, he increasingly found fault with the way the animal rights agencies do business to achieve their goals. Wanting to have some fun, he created PEOPLE EATING TASTY ANIMALS, a book of recipeshe intends to poke fun at such groups and generate lauther.

Arlen provides real-sounding, intricate recipes for such dishes as Cheetah Chimichanga, Barbecued Beaver and Cat Tacos. He suggests people savemoney by eating the meat of their 50-pound poodle when it dies, and he points out that a beached whale could be an economical meal choicethat could simply supple enough meat for an entire family reunion. Filled with color illustrations, the book is designedto be placed on the coffee table, opened at any page and shared with friends.

PEOPLE EATING TASTY ANIMALS is available for sale at, Booksurge and through additional wholesale and retail channels worldwide.

About the author Robert Arlen has owned two pet shops, loves animals and wishes PETA had a sense of humor. He currently lives in Virginia Beach, VA and he says he has personally never tried any of the recipes in PEOPLE EATING TASTY ANIMALS.

Wednesday, December 14, 2011

Federal Judge Rules PETA Can Be Sued For Naming Whistle-Blower

By Lynn Herman

A Florida deputy sheriff who lost his job after telling People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals that his former co-worker was allegedly abusing police dogs, can sue PETA for outing him as a whistle-blower, a federal judge ruled.

PETA allegedly made an oral promise to protect the identity of former deputy officer Jason Yerk when he agreed to talk to PETA about the suspected animal abuse, as a corroborating witness, within the Lee County Sheriff’s Office.

However, PETA disclosed his identity to the sheriff’s office during the internal affair investigation and he had to resign, according to the complaint reported by Courthouse News.

Yerk claims that PETA intentionally broke the oral agreement, knowing that he would be subject to reprisals. He sued PETA for breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, misrepresentation, breach of oral contract and negligence, saying that PETA’s disclosure caused him lost wages, benefits and earning capacity.

PETA contested the existence of a confidentiality agreement protecting his identity and claimed that since law enforcement had compelled PETA to identify Yerk, therefore his name could not remain confidential.

Yerk initially denied talking to PETA, but came clean following an internal affairs investigation. Thus, PETA sought to dismiss Yerk’s action claiming that his perjury during the investigation invalidated his claims.

U.S. District Judge John Steele rebuffed PETA’s argument, finding that Yerk’s untruthfulness does not constitute “illegal” conduct under any Florida statute, since his statements had no bearing on the result of the investigation. What’s more, the internal affairs interview was not an “official proceeding.

Steele also rejected PETA’s contention that the confidentiality agreement contradicted Florida public policy and was therefore unenforceable. “In this case, the confidentiality agreement allowed PETA to disclose the substance of the alleged abuse and the identity of the witnesses to it,” according to the Nov. 4 ruling. “The agreement only precluded the disclosure of the identity of PETA’s source. While it seems clear that the confidentiality agreement did not and could not create an absolute privilege, and would eventually give way to lawful procedures which could compel disclosure of the source’s identity, that stage had not arrived in this case. At the time of the disclosure in this case, PETA was not legally required to answer questions from the LCSO [Lee County Sheriff's Office].”

Steele left it up to a jury to decide whether Yerk’s resignation was reasonably foreseeable to PETA and whether PETA had caused his employment-related damages.

The court denied PETA’s motion for reconsideration on Dec. 1.


PETA claims UTA officers stifled activists' free speech during circus

By Dennis Romboy, Deseret News

SALT LAKE CITY — PETA filed a lawsuit against two Utah Transit Authority police officers Wednesday, claiming they stopped activists from handing out anti-circus fliers at a TRAX station.

Animal rights activists Jeremy Beckham and Jessica Johnson were talking to people and distributing literature on the rail platform north of EnergySolutions Arena in September during a Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus performance. They say UTA officers Jordan Hamilton and Connor Macke told them they were violating UTA ordinances and threatened to cite them for trespassing if they didn't leave.

Beckham, a PETA employee, and Johnson, a PETA volunteer, left the platform. Both live in Salt Lake County.

The lawsuit, which does not name UTA, contends the officers violated the activists' free-speech rights, noting a UTA ordinance permits "public speaking" and the "distribution of non-commercial written materials" at transit facilities. It seeks an injunction to ensure the activity is allowed.

"The UTA officers had no legal right to force these activists to stop politely speaking out against Ringling Bros. circus, which routinely beats and whips the animals it forces to perform in its shows," said PETA director Delcianna Winders. "Without an injunction, we have no guarantee that our right to free speech will be protected."

UTA spokesman Gerry Carpenter said he couldn't comment on the lawsuit, adding neither the transit authority nor the officers have received formal notification of the complaint.

Carpenter pointed to sections in the ordinance that are exceptions to rules allowing public speaking and passing out fliers. Those activities, according to the ordinance, must not occur in the transit right-of-way or impede passengers or rail service.

UTA, he said, considers the platform part of the right-of-way.

"Our officers are required to enforce UTA ordinances and Utah law," he said.

The lawsuit contends Beckham and Johnson did not disrupt, impede or interfere with transit services, the movement of passengers or UTA employees, or public safety.

Deseret News

Tuesday, December 6, 2011

PETA calls on Kentucky not to allow elephant rides

Associated Press

PETA is urging the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources not to repeal a ban on elephant rides at circuses and fairs.

The animal rights group said in a letter to Kentucky officials that elephants are dangerous animals and that putting children on their backs "is like placing them on a ticking time bomb."

Elephant rides were banned in Louisville following a 1994 incident in which a man visiting the Louisville Zoo was picked up and dropped several times by an elephant.

A push to lift Kentucky's restrictions has led to strong opposition from animal advocates.

The Humane Society of the United States also has called on state wildlife officials not to lift the ban.

The Washington Examiner

Katherine Heigl Launches 'I Hate Balls' Campaign for Pets

Submitted by Phyllis M Daugherty on Dec 5, 2011

Move over naked PETA ladies! Males--or at least a certain part of their anatomy—have become the shock factor in an irreverent new humane effort. Katherine Heigl has just launched her “I Hate Balls!” campaign to save the world by eliminating testicles!

"I can't cut the nuts off human men — yet. So I've dedicated my time to the neutering of dogs. Because that's legal!" says Heigl in a satirical PSA intended to bring attention to the need to neuter dogs and cats.

Katherine Heigl, through the Jason Debus Heigl Foundation, has sponsored many spay-and-neuter programs to decrease pet overpopulation. It appears she has lost patience with conventional messages.

She describes testicles as jiggly, crinkly, muppet-like, and disgusting and basically without positive merit but assures us she doesn’t hate men. When Katherine’s husband begs her to give his balls back so he can have a night out with the boys, she hands him a jar definitely appearing to contain what is extracted during a castration.

Katherine Heigl has taken a daring plunge to start an unusual conversation about neutering via a graphic derision of “balls.” And there’s no question, if anyone has a pair, it is Katherine Heigl!

This PSA is enough to make even the most macho, self-assured males cringe, but does it accomplish the goal of making you want to cut the balls off your dog (or cat)?

Opposing Views

Thursday, November 24, 2011

Why PETA Is Meat’s Best Friend

Jokes are not the best way to deal with the question of animal suffering

By Josh Ozersky

Eating meat involves killing animals, an act few of us ever witness, let alone participate in. I’m okay with that; I’ve gone on record as saying that I love meat and animals but never want to be present at the moment when one becomes the other. That’s me. But many other Americans are ambivalent, and on the eve of the biggest dead-animal holiday of the year, the highest-profile animal rights organization in the country, PETA, has failed, yet again, to make anybody feel remotely bad about eating animals.

What’s unfortunate for that organization is that in the same week it did one of its idiotic publicity stunts — asking Turkey, Texas, to change its name to Tofurkey, Texas — somebody else did the job PETA should have been doing and documented the abuses taking place at Sparboe Farms, a massive egg farm that sold to McDonald’s. 20/20’s video, which is ghastly, succeeded in getting McDonald’s and fellow Sparboe customer Target to immediately drop it as a supplier. No Sandusky-style “internal investigation,” no temporizing, no excuses; just a swift stroke of the knife. When that happened, untold millions of chickens were spared the cruelties shown so starkly in the video. For farms of that scale, losing McDonald’s is tantamount to Lockheed losing the Pentagon. It’s practically their reason for being. And you can bet other big suppliers don’t want to lose McDonald’s either. So real-world economic pressures changed the way animals live and die in America — just as they did in 2007, when Burger King became the first of the fast-food giants to implement a cruelty-free meat program.

Meanwhile, PETA, which should be in the vanguard of this type of thing, just keeps pulling lame pranks that make people like me feel even better about eating meat. Tofurkey, Texas? Really? Everything about the setup is dumb: the idea that the name of a town is equivalent to killing the thing it’s named for, the choice of a Texan town (the birthplace of Bob Wills!), the choice of a weird, fake, tasteless product as a substitute. It’s just so tone-deaf, just like another recent stunt in which PETA went after Super Mario for dressing up like a raccoon. (According to the press release, “Tanooki may be just a ‘suit’ in Mario games, but by wearing the skin of an animal, Mario is sending the message that it’s OK to wear fur.”)

Sometimes I think that PETA is a front group for the National Cattleman’s Council. Why else would its members go out of their way to seem so crankish and pissy? How is that supposed to help? PETA, as one of the biggest animal-rights groups in the world, should be doing more to combat puppy mills, unnecessary and inhumane cosmetic testing and the like. But instead of waiting until it has something really important to say, the group issues dopey agit-prop press releases and what ends up happening is that PETA and the movement it represents becomes a joke. Literally. I wish I had copyrighted that “People for the Eating of Tasty Animals” T-shirt that I see everywhere.

Monday, November 21, 2011

PETA's latest Thanksgiving scare tactic

By MIKE JONES Associate Editor

Someone tell the folks over at People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals that Halloween is over and they can stop scaring the kids, although it won't do any good.

PETA abides by the old Hollywood axiom of, "I don't care what you say about me as long as you spell my name right." I know that and I'm probably falling right into that trap, but, despite giving PETA publicity, sometimes the things it does simply can't go unnoticed or uncriticized.

PETA has outraged a lot of folks over the years. It is good at it - and it knows it. It hasn't let us down this holiday season. This year PETA is introducing new billboards. A few cities have been targeted, including Tulsa. The billboards are supposed to show up near schools.

The billboard depicts an animal that is a cross between a turkey and a cute black and white dog. It has a dog face and turkey body. The billboard's message: "Kids: If You Wouldn't Eat Your Dog, Why Eat a Turkey?" Seriously, that's what it says.


PETA innocently says it hopes to establish a dialogue between kids and parents about becoming a vegetarian rather than eating meat. Baloney. What PETA is trying to do, what it is always trying to do, is frighten kids. It wants to plant a horrible picture in the heads' of prepubescents that will give them nightmares and ruin everybody's Thanksgiving dinner. Does PETA somehow expect such crass behavior to set little ones along the path to the righteousness of veganism?

As of Friday, there had been no reports of PETA's billboards in Tulsa. Maybe PETA had a change of heart. I doubt it. It's more likely it couldn't get the billboard space or is waiting until closer to Thanksgiving.

Let's get something straight. I love animals. I have two rescue dogs in my home. I have always had pets and I've always treated them well. My dogs, these two and previous dogs, are a part of my family. There was a time when cats also resided in my house. All but one of those was a rescue pet. I no longer hunt. I no longer fish. I don't kill spiders (except for black widows) or snakes. I even have trouble doing in the mouse that wanders around my house. (The dogs certainly are no help.) I don't wear fur.

But I have no problems with those who do hunt or fish. I'm not too crazy about people wearing fur and it upsets me when someone kills a snake for no good reason. And I believe that everyone ought get their dogs and cats from the pound or at least someone's unwanted litter.

On the other hand, I grew up around a farm. There were ducks, chickens, dogs, cats, pigs, milk cows, beef cattle, sheep, horses and a few other critters I have forgotten. Back then I hunted and fished. We ate what we killed - squirrels, rabbits, quail, fish and maybe a few other things that my grandpa figured I was better off not knowing about.

One piece of advice I have given my son (maybe the only good advice and likely the only bit he paid attention to) is never give a name to something you might end up eating.

A purpose

Yes, I have seen slaughter houses. I know what goes on there. I've witnessed the process from start to finish. It's not pretty. Admittedly, most of my up-close encounters were with the food we raised and ate. We sent one steer a year off to slaughter, as well as hogs. The chickens we dismissed ourselves on Sundays. I know there are issues with some big corporate farms where cattle, hogs, chickens and turkeys are raised in some pretty sad conditions. I would hope that those conditions can change. I can't bring myself to eat veal.

When you grow up on or around a farm, you learn pretty quickly that everything there has a purpose. Most of those purposes have something to do with eating.

Obviously, I am not against eating meat or poultry or fish or cheese or drinking milk. Neither do I condemn those who don't. I have friends and family members who are or have been vegetarians or vegans. They don't try to convert me nor I them. They certainly don't try to scare the hell out of the kids.

For PETA, however, there is no middle ground, no compromising. Its tactics can be despicable. Taunting customers, again, mostly kids, at burger joints or at fishing derbies. This latest one that puts a turkey on equal footing with a dog does no good toward the cause of vegetarianism. It will do no more than confuse and frighten kids. As far as I'm concerned, it borders on abuse.

The people at PETA ought to be ashamed, but I'm sure they won't be. And they can send me the thank-you note for giving them the publicity for another one of their whacky, tasteless promotions.

Sometimes, however, stupid and mean-spirited simply can't be ignored.

Pass the turkey. Pet the dogs.

Tulsa World

Friday, November 11, 2011

By Chris Davis

TULSA, Okla. —

A new billboard that may go up soon in Tulsa would feature a picture of a crossbred animal meant to educate kids about Thanksgiving turkeys. It's from PETA and they ask, "Kids, if you wouldn't eat your dog, why eat a turkey?"

When we learned PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) may be placing these billboards in the community, we wanted to know what the reasoning was. So, I got on the phone to Paige Snyder, a representative for the group.

"Thanksgiving should be a time for celebration and not a time for animal abuse," she said. "Turkeys may not be as familiar to us as dogs and cats, but they have the same capacity to suffer and that's something kids inately understand."

The plan is to place the billboards near Tulsa schools to spark discussions between kids and parents.

"There are lots of kids out there who just don't want to see a dead bird as a centerpiece at Thanksgiving dinner. Hopefully our billboards will spark discussions with their parents." She says then maybe kids would want to give the turkeys a break.

Snyder told me Tulsa is one of only three cities being targeted with the illustrations.

"We're hoping to get them up in Tulsa, Jacksonville and also Salem, Oregon," she said.

And the alternative Thanksgiving meal-a Tofurky. It's a simulated, largely soy-based meat-like product that PETA officials are certain would delight children who know of the plight of the 250 million turkeys killed in the U.S. each year. Almost 40 million of those are killed for the holiday.

PETA's website says turkeys that are bred for food are often crammed into dirty warehouses and die from disease, smothering or heart attack before being slaughtered. The organization points out that the breeding process makes harvest turkeys overweight and their legs buckle from the excess meat.

PETA says vegan meals are a more humane source for holiday food.

News Talk Radio

Tuesday, November 8, 2011

PETA draws on slavery law to free whales

Animal rights campaigners in the United States have begun a legal battle for the release of five killer whales.

The People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) argue that the whales are being kept as slaves at the SeaWorld marine parks and should be set free under America's 13th Amendment.

"It's the first case in the history of the US that seeks to extend constitutional rights to living, breathing, feeling beings who happen not have been born human," PETA's legal counsel Jeff Kerr said.

Mr Kerr will be taking the case before a judge in California.

"The case is based upon the plain text of the 13th Amendment, which outlaws the condition of slavery, without any reference to any particular class of victims and without reference to persons," he said.

"Slavery does not depend on the species of the slave any more than it depends upon the gender, race, or religion of the slave."

Thomas Jefferson School of Law professor David Steinberg says he finds PETA's claim surprising.

"I never believed that I would hear an argument that human slaves were comparable to animals in a zoo but that is in essence PETA's argument," he said.

"The 13th Amendment was designed to abolish the abhorrent practice of slavery, of enslaving human beings without compensation, treating human beings as property.

"That is something entirely different from the question of whether a marine park like Sea World should or should not have orcas."

But Mr Kerr said it was clear to him that the whales were suffering in captivity.

"By any reasonable definition, these five orcas are enslaved," he said.

"They were forcibly ripped from their homes and families, with whom they would have spent their entire life in nature, they're held captive in the equivalent of concrete bathtubs that cause them great stress and illness and make them aggressive.

"They're denied everything natural to them, they're forced to perform tricks for SeaWorld's profit and they've been turned into virtual breeding machines to churn out more performers for Sea World's tawdry shows.

"So these wild captured animals who are now forced to perform for fleeting human amusement, are by any reasonable definition slaves."

Professor Steinberg however says the 13th Amendment was never intended to apply to animals.

"It was obvious that slavery meant slavery of human beings," he said.

"The fact that it doesn't say people is because the term was unnecessary to the 13th Amendment, it would have been surplusage."

In a statement, SeaWorld said it had no higher priority than the welfare of the animals in its care.

Mr Kerr however is convinced that the days of marine parks for large mammals are numbered.

"This is going to happen whether it's in this lawsuit or next month or next year, the fundamental rights of animals to be free from human enslavement is going to be recognised," he said.

"It's just a question of when and we believe that the time is right, certainly we believe that the public is ready, we know the orcas are definitely ready and we believe that the law is in place.
"So we're anxious to have the case heard."

Yahoo! 7 News

PETA targets Battlefield 3 for cruelty against rats

EA's wartime shooter cited in animal rights complaint
Matt Bradford on November 8, 2011

A German branch of PETA, the worldwide animal rights organization that apparently uses Minority Report-esque technology to predict and fight future animal crimes, is taking Battlefield 3 to task over its murderous treatment of virtual rats; a treatment, it says, that will motivate young men to practice their rat-killing impulses on real life victims.

“The realistic computer game 'Battlefield 3' treats animals in a sadistic manner,” reads part of PETA translated statement. “The game gives players the option to kill a rat with a combat knife in the back in order to then lift it by its tail, then toss it away. Killing virtual animals can have a brutalizing effect on the young male target audience. There have been repeated cases of animal cruelty in Germany, where young people kill animals. Inspiration behind these acts often came from movies and computer games.”

There is some merit to the argument that fictitious violence—be it in TV, movies, video games, or 1940s radio plays--begets real life violence in a tiny sub-section of unbalanced players. Still, to say BF3 should be called out for its rat killing is like saying Grand Theft Auto IV should be flogged for its depiction of crimes against mail boxes; that is, there are bigger fish to be let free to swim forever in blissful harmony with nature.

The last time PETA took aim at video games was with the launch of its Super Meat Boy mock game, Super Tofu Boy. Perhaps this means we'll soon be playing Rattlefield 3?


Wednesday, October 26, 2011

Wisconsin Farm Bureau leader defends dairy industry

For years, outside activist groups have been trying to discredit the dairy industry, painting dairy products as "fattening" and "unhealthy," said Wisconsin Farm Bureau Federation President Bill Bruins.

"There's no denying the fact that groups like PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) and the HSUS (The Humane Society of the United States) and the rest of the 'foodies' are really trying to scare the consuming public away from eating animal products," Bruins said. "I don't see any legitimate reason why people are going after the dairy industry."

Bruins, of Waupun, points out that dairy products are still included on the USDA Food Pyramid which illustrates the components of a healthy diet. The USDA recommends two to three servings from the dairy group and stresses the importance of using low-fat products.

Bruins concurs with Laura Wilford, a registered dietician for the Wisconsin Milk Marketing Board, that dairy products combined with a healthy diet can help a person maintain or lose weight.

"I don't think you can refute that," Bruins said. "It's what you put on the plate along side of that milk."

Bruins firmly believes that dairy products are a wise choice for consumers.

"I just think the consuming public has to feel good about using milk and dairy products in their diet. They are tested and screened and are wholesome and healthy foods," he said.

PETA's version of truth

NEVER let the facts get in the way of a good story seems to be the motto of animal rights group PETA.
As the northern hemisphere moves into winter, the dills at PETA is telling people 10 good reasons not to wear wool.
The sheep, you see, will get depressed, according to PETA.

"(Sheep) show signs of depression similar to those that humans show by hanging their heads and avoiding positive actions."

On the other hand, when sheep are happy they "wag their tails when they are stroked, just like dogs".

"They affectionately nuzzle people in order to get their attention."

Awww, isn't that cute?

But the best "reason" of all is the sheep's fleece is an unnatural overload that "causes many sheep to collapse and even die of heat exhaustion during hot months".

Err, if it were true, wouldn't that be a good reason to shear them?


Tuesday, October 11, 2011

PETA plans to relocate deer within Kinston city limits

According to an official within the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals organization, local members plan to start trapping area deer and squirrels.

“We’re not trapping them for sport, though,” said Edith Cronhour of Kinston. “We’re going to move them to a safe place — the city limits.”

Cronhour said she and fellow PETA members have so far captured four deer and 17 squirrels.
“We believe it’s inhumane to hunt down these poor animals for sport,” Cronhour said. “We figured the only way to get these animals out of the reach of the hunter’s rifles was to move them to an area where shooting is illegal — the city.”

Fellow Animal Security Specialist (A.S.S.) Jeremy Montaugh says he looks forward to the day when young fawns will be spotted drinking out of the coffee cups of homeless people on Queen Street.
“Me and some of my buddies did a trial run of this program in Boston a few years ago,” Montaugh said. “There were a few hitches — the sight of a deer being roasted in an alley by a group of homeless people was demoralizing. We tried to explain to the homeless guys that meat was bad for them, but they just kept biting us on the ankles, so we had to leave.”

Hunters in Lenoir, Greene and Jones counties have reacted with a combination of disbelief and what one witness described as “violent guffaws.”

“Hunting is a tradition in our family,” said Jon Nugent of Wheat Swamp. “I’ll bet this PETA crowd is the same bunch who don’t get upset when a human being dies, but if the President of The United States swats at a fly, they get their panties in a knot.

“And for the record, I ain’t against panties; I wear my frilly John Deere britches every time I go hunting; see — they’ve got a flower on the front.”

What Nugent was referring to was a statement released by PETA after President Obama was shown swatting a fly during an interview. The following is an excerpt:

“We support compassion for all animals, even the most curious, smallest, and least sympathetic animals. We hope that everyone will take inspiration from Nobel Peace Prize winner Dr. Albert Schweitzer, who included insects in his realm of compassion and would stop to move a worm from hot pavement to cool earth.”

While Cronhour and Montaugh seem committed to the cause, fellow A.S.S. Bill Scheft of Greene County admits he’s on board for selfish reasons.

“One day in college, me and a buddy got in what we thought was a line for Phish tickets,” Scheft said. “I guess we’d done too much baking the night before, but it turns out we’d actually joined a protest against coffee grinding machines. No, dude, totally, this really hot chick at the rally told me if you put your ear up against the grinder, you can actually hear the tiny screams of each coffee bean as it’s ground to a fine powder.”

Scheft said that day changed his life forever, although he still drinks at least a gallon of coffee before 10 a.m. everyday.

“I learned that hot, politically active chicks dig dudes they think are politically active, too,” Scheft said. “Picking up women at protests is much cheaper than normal dating. I don’t waste money on dinners, because all I have to do is say I’m protesting the low pay the restaurant workers receive; that same argument guarantees I’ll never have to read another newspaper again.”
Cronhour said a holding pen for the deer and squirrels has been erected in a secluded location adjacent to the Kinston city limits.

“It’s been quite a challenge housing these animals; the feces has piled up a lot quicker than I thought,” Cronhour said. “In retrospect, it may have been ill-advised to feed them spaghetti.”
On the other side of the fence, John Nugent says he’s started a group of his own to combat what he refers to as “a group of hippies who should be forced to crop tobacco for a summer.”

“Me and the boys from the Tin Shack Hunting Club are going to set up our deer stands inside the Kinston city limits,” Nugent said. “We usually tick a lot of people off out in the county when they’re trying to enjoy a quiet Saturday afternoon, but we figure a little extra gunfire added to the mix of the usual city gunfire won’t disturb anybody in Kinston.”

When asked if he thought hunters migrating into the city to hunt would cause an increase in the amount of gunfire within the city limits, local panhandler Crazy Courthouse Man responded dolefully:
“There are so many guns in Kinston, the deer will probably learn how to use them and shoot back, orange hats or not; deer are color-blind, you know. Them deer from the county are all high from sniffing them meth labs; let them get in here and tangle with these crackheads; they’ll have to put wheels on that gun boat and run ‘em all out’n here together. Have you every seen two groups shooting at each other while running from a third?

“It’ll make you wet your britches. Whoops … guess I’m way ahead of ’em.”

Wednesday, September 28, 2011

PETA's eagle argument should fly away

Credit: Vasha Hunt/Opelika-Auburn News
Spirit flies before the first half of the Auburn Tigers' season-opening football game against the Utah State Aggies on Saturday, Sept. 3, in Jordan-Hare Stadium in Auburn.

PETA should thank Auburn University.

It should thank the university for serving as home to the Southeastern Raptor Center, where an estimated 200 wounded or orphaned birds of prey are brought for rehabilitation annually and, if health permits, released back into the wild.

It should thank the university for allowing the Raptor Center to educate thousands about such birds, moving many of them to further appreciate their beauty and necessity in the ecosystem. An educated public helps foster a more caring, generous attitude toward such animals.

PETA should thank Auburn for being home to one of the nation’s finest veterinary schools. The university is renowned for its hospital care toward animals, large or small, and for teaching others how to care for their pets and make them feel loved.

But instead, a member of the organization chose to throw darts through a letter to the Montgomery Advertiser simply because a highly improbable incident drew national attention.

Before last Saturday’s Auburn-Mississippi State football game at Jordan-Hare Stadium, Spirit, the Raptor Center’s bald eagle and a symbol of our nation, made a detour never before taken during the 11-year history of pre-game flights. The eagle glided into a luxury box glass window, was briefly stunned, recovered and resumed the flight.

If PETA was so concerned about Spirit’s safety, why did it wait until the bird glided into the window to make noise in the media?

If these flights were deemed so unsafe, why didn’t PETA cry foul long ago? Oh, the incident drew national headlines — and maybe the PETA letter simply piggy-backed on that news in an attempt to draw attention to the organization.

PETA does a wonderful job policing true animal cruelty, where neglect and physical cruelty to animals should be battled. There are crimes committed against animals out there, and we encourage PETA to continue the fight against such activities.

In Spirit’s case, we have a symbolic, well-cared-for bird whom thousands adore and only want to love and cherish — and he simply glided into a window. Somehow here, we see a large difference between a minor accident and animal cruelty.

PETA activists visit Vancouver with anti-sport fishing message

By Stephen Thomson,
A pair of animal-rights activists from the U.S. spoke out against recreational fishing during a visit to Vancouver.
Hayden Hamilton, a campaigner with People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, said her group is urging families to show compassion by leaving fish in the water.
“Nobody wants to set a bad example for their kids but when they take their kids fishing they’re really sending them a very dangerous message: that it’s fun to torment and abuse animals,” she told the Straight in an interview.
Hayden described fish as sensitive and intelligent but said they don’t get the same kind of sympathy as household animals like dogs and cats.
“Parents would never dream of spending a weekend trying to hook the family dog, but hooking a fish through the mouth and dragging him through the water is just as cruel as hooking the family dog and dragging him behind your car,” she said.
Hayden and another PETA member were sharing their message with people walking along a path next to Coal Harbour today (September 23). They handed out leaflets that read: “Don’t let your kids become hookers”.
“We’re here to let parents and children know that it’s wrong to abuse animals,” she said.
The visit to Vancouver and stops in Washington State earlier this week were in lead up to “Fish Amnesty Day” on Saturday, according to PETA.


PETA attacks shark attack victim, says "Payback is Hell"

Following an apparent shark attack in the Bay area this weekend, the animal rights organization PETA has announced plans to run an outdoor advertising campaign attacking a recent Bay area shark attack victim.
The organization plans to promote an ad that shows a human "drumstick" hanging out of a shark's mouth, next to the words "Payback Is
 Hell. Go Vegan."
The organization will put the ad on benches and billboards near Anna Maria Island, they said will promote their claim that "the deadliest killers in the water aren't sharks -- they're humans."

"Humans hook, spear, maim, and kill fish for 'sport' every day," says PETA Executive Vice President Tracy Reiman. "The most dangerous predator of all is the one holding the fishing rod or standing at the 'all you can eat' seafood buffet."

The organization said fish are aware of their surroundings, have complex nervous systems, and feel pain.
In a Skype interview, Campaign Director Ashley Byrne said, "We are very glad that Mr. Wickersham is going to be ok, but we do hope that this painful and frightening experience makes him think about the pain and fear that he’s causing to fish -- and other fisherman are causing to fish.”
The campaign comes after Longboat Key resident Charles Wickersham, 21, was bitten by an apparent shark while he was spearfishing several miles off the coast of Anna Maria Island.

Wickersham remains in intensive care after the apparent shark attack.

Wickersham and a group of friends were fishing out in the Gulf Saturday when Wickersham yelled something bit him on his left thigh.

Friends took Wickersham, or CJ, as he is known, to shore. Manatee Co. EMS met the boat in the Rod and Reel Pier area of Anna Maria Island around 3 p.m. Saturday

Bay News 9

Thursday, September 15, 2011

Fury over rabbit fur ban

FARMERS and fashion industry figures are up in arms over a ban on rabbit fur.

This follows the banning of a rabbit-fur design during Melbourne's Spring Fashion Week.

The decision, made by Melbourne Lord Mayor Robert Doyle and his council, prevented the bodice - made from pest rabbits - appearing on the catwalk on Saturday after threats of protests from People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.

The decision left Mallee RMIT student designer Molly Herben stunned. She said the decision to ban her design was an "injustice".

Her fur outfit used rabbits culled in a Government-backed eradication property near her home town of Yaapeet, and took four months to create. Victorian Farmers Federation Land Management chairman Gerald Leach said the ban was an "insult" to Ms Herben.

"She was making a resource out of a pest that was going to be killed anyway, Mr Leach said.

"It's really disappointing the organisers of the fashion show are so far removed from reality to let PETA get away with this.

"Perhaps we need to get the Lord Mayor up here into the country so he can understand what a problem this pest is."

Mallee farmer Jason Scott, who has a property near Ouyen, said rabbits had stripped thousands of dollars of value from crops in the region.

"It's a pretty small-minded, short-sighted decision," he said.

"This isn't a native animal, this is a pest," Mr Scott said.

"Farmers need to control the numbers and if someone can value-add with the pelts, a make a living, it should be encouraged."

Fashion blogger Nadia Napreychikov, from Melbourne label DI$COUNT, where Ms Herben has been an intern, said the decision was "appalling".

"For so many reasons this decision is appalling and a complete compromise on creative freedom and art," Ms Napreychikov said.

"She is using fur from a pest that is legal to kill, that kills farming industry.

"These animals were not killed for her work."

Ms Herben scrambled to replace outfits for Saturday's Emerging Designers show.

These were made of leather and put together with the help of other RMIT students.

Friends wore rabbit ears at Saturday's show in support of Ms Herben while supporters have written to Mr Doyle criticising the decision.

"I was humbled by the response from the general public," Ms Herben, 22, said.

"It was wonderful to hear that those who did not know me personally felt strong enough about the issue to stand up and have an opinion."

The council's decision came after PETA activists stormed a fashion week runway last week, brandishing anti-fur placards for five minutes before leaving the stage.

Cr Doyle told the media last week: "We had to think very hard about this (ban) because, although these young designers have put in an awful lot of work, we couldn't risk something happening,"

When quizzed further about the decision, a City of Melbourne spokeswoman said security at the Saturday event would be "adequate" but: "Our designers have worked extremely hard on their collections and we don't want their big moment overshadowed by protesters."

Ironically, Saturday's night show was promoted as "bold, uncensored collections".

RMIT publicly supported the decision but it is understood members of the school's fashion department were privately fuming.

Another designer, Melbourne-based Jack Loder, was forced to withdraw some of his dresses, which featured impala fur and feather trim.

Under Victorian law, wild rabbits are defined as an established pest and land owners must "take all reasonable steps to prevent the spread of, and as far as possible eradicate, established pest animals".

Molly's father, Ian Herben, who was among a 60-strong contingent from Yaapeet at the show, said his daughter was assured by the university four months ago that the pelts could be used.

"There were some initial discussions, but she was assured it would be no problem," he said.

"It's just ridiculous. A small minority shouldn't be able to dictate to everyone else when 99.99 per cent of the population thinks it's OK."

"The ironic thing is, the DPI had been going around the district asking farmers to eradicate their rabbits or they would be fined," Mr Herben said.

PETA said it welcomed the council's decision, and that the only decent rabbit control was preventing breeding.

"I think the designer is trying to greenwash the public. There is no such thing as ethically-produced fur," PETA Australia campaigns manager Ashley Fruno said.

"It's common place for rabbits to be poisoned, caught in snares, mauled by dogs, or shot.

"Any designer, student or not, should think twice about using real fur. PETA is always watching."

WeeklyTimes Now

Monday, September 5, 2011

Of Course PETA's Planning to Launch a Porn Site

Adam Clark Estes - Aug 22, 2011 
The attention-hungry activists at PETA want to launch a pornography site that combines "a lot of girl and boy next door content" with pictures of animals being mistreated. Pending their application to the the operators of the .xxx domain, the animal rights organization wants to spread their message as widely as possible and isn't shy about the power of sex appeal. "We try to use absolutely every outlet to stick up for animals," PETA spokesperson Linsay Rijt told The Huffington Post, a site that's also known for manipulating the power of sex appeal. "We live in a 24 hour news cycle world, and we learn the racy things we do are sometimes the most effective way that we can reach particular individuals."
This has been a long time coming. PETA's ad campaigns have been called pornographic since 1991. That year, the organization launched their "I'd rather go naked than wear fur" campaign and drew criticism from women's rights organizations for featuring Pamela Anderson and other naked celebrities, most of them women. PETA knew they had a hit and have spun off the campaign into countless different sexually charged slogans. PETA's also kept a close relationship with Playboy and featured a number of Hugh Hefner's wives and playmates in these ads. "Playboy is helping us put the 'T & A' in PETA," says PETA senior vice president and former Baywatch star Dan Matthews, who's been arrested more than once for protesting naked.

As Matthews and PETA have been arguing for nearly 30 years now, the skin-centric ads do attract attention, and the media's pounced on the porn announcement. "I can imagine that, should this be a subscription-only affair, it will surely attract a considerable and very particular following," said CNET blogger and ad industry veteran Chris Matyszczyk. "Finally, they can skip the "we love animals!" charade and get right down to bringing us the tits they've been all about showcasing this entire time," remarked Erin Gloria Ryan at Jezebel. "Apparently they are planning to juxtapose porn with images of mistreated animals," wrote Carmel Lobello at Death & Taxes. "For any sane person, images of mistreated animals should be an instant boner-killer."

The Atlantic Wire

Tuesday, July 26, 2011

PETA Kills Animals

PETA Killed a Shocking 94 Percent of Adoptable Dogs and Cats in its Care During 2010

Another Year, Another Horrendous PETA Slaughter of Homeless Pets

Animal lovers worldwide now have access to more than a decade's worth of evidence showing that People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) kills thousands of defenseless pets at its Virginia headquarters. Since 1998, PETA has opted to "put down" 25,840 adoptable dogs, cats, puppies, and kittens instead of finding them "forever homes."

PETA's "Animal Record" report for 2010, which the animal rights group itself filed with the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, shows that PETA employees killed 94 percent of the dogs and cats in their care last year. During all of 2010, PETA found adoptive homes for just 44 pets.

Just 44 dogs and cats—out of the 2,345 PETA took in. Those numbers are abysmal, and they and offer little hope for homeless animals to escape perishing on PETA's version of "death row."

The Virginia Beach SPCA, just down the road from PETA's Norfolk headquarters, manages to adopt out the vast majority of the animals in its care. And it does it on a shoestring budget

Why would PETA, an "animal rights" group, secretly kill animals at its headquarters? From a cost-saving standpoint, PETA's hypocrisy isn't difficult to understand: Killing adoptable cats and dogs—and storing the bodies in a walk-in freezer until they can be cremated—requires far less money and effort than caring for the pets until they are adopted.

PETA has a $33 million annual budget. But instead of investing in the lives of the thousands of flesh-and-blood creatures in its care, the group spends millions on media campaigns telling Americans that eating meat, drinking milk, fishing, hunting, wearing leather shoes, and benefiting from medical research performed on lab rats are all "unethical."

The bottom line is that PETA's leaders care more about cutting into their advertising budget than finding homes for the six pets, on average, that they kill every single day.

Years of public outrage has not been enough to convince PETA to eliminate its pet eradication program. Now the death toll of animals in PETA's care has reached 25,840, including 2,200 pets in 2010 alone.

PETA has ceased being an animal charity. It's behaving more like a slaughterhouse.

(Source -