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 Amazon.com, 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.

jobmouse

No comments:

Post a Comment