Skip to comments.
PETA linked to terrorist organization
Activistcash.com ^
| 2/26/02
Posted on 02/26/2002 3:31:38 PM PST by Libloather
While PETA and the other groups condemn scientific research involving animals (90 percent of which are rodents, according to Americans for Medical Progress, a pro-research foundation), they spend a pittance on animal shelters. Eleven million animals are destroyed annually for lack of facilities. Yet PETA spent less than $3,955 of its $12 million in fiscal year 1995 and $6,100 of its $10.9 million in fiscal 1996 for shelter programs, according to its nonprofit tax forms filed with the IRS.
In contrast, PETA sent $70,500 in 1995 to Rodney Coronado, a convicted arsonist and avowed member of the domestic-terrorist group called the Animal Liberation Front. Coronado served a five-year federal prison sentence for a 1992 animal-rights-related firebombing at Michigan State University.
Unapologetic about its ties to domestic terrorism, PETA also made a cash donation in 2001 to the North American Earth Liberation Front, a group that the FBI has called a domestic terrorist organization.
TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: enviralists
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-39 last
To: Libloather
Thank you.
To: Libloather
...were going to be blowing things up and smashing windows.
I think its a great way to bring about animal liberation, considering the level of suffering, the atrocities....How come they're always freeing minks or chickens? Why not break the tigers out of some zoo? Wouldn't be to hard to sneak in and defeat the cage bars.
22
posted on
02/28/2002 3:06:48 PM PST
by
SJackson
To: Libloather
Wait a minute, doesn't that make them eligible to have their assets frozen? Supporting terrorists? I would love to see all of PETA's assets frozen, and their fundraising ended.
23
posted on
02/28/2002 3:15:24 PM PST
by
Eva
To: dubyas_vision
While I agree with 75% of what they say, they go about it 180 degrees wrong, leaving me to disagree with 95% We agree on their actions. IMO they have some valid points around the margins. What positions would you include in that 75%?
24
posted on
02/28/2002 3:45:42 PM PST
by
SJackson
To: Libloather
So, what is the point of posting this article on this site? Why would you elect to take up space - there are no minds to change here, there is not material reason to go over the same PETA issues, over and over again, with the same responses over, and over again, same freepers responding with the same lame quotes, etc., etc., please get a life.
To: Ban Draoi
According to one of the presiding judges, the Nazis valued animals over humans.Is it possible then that PETA memebers are the reincarnation of Nazy members sts?
26
posted on
03/01/2002 4:02:11 PM PST
by
Kaslin
To: grist for the mill
Thanks for the bump, 'more for the grill'...
To: SJackson
I agree with PETA that animal testing for cosmetic products is completely unnecessary. Personally I would rather use the same brands of shampoo/cologne/toothpaste for my entire life than know that lab animals are being tortured daily to provide me with a new deodorant.
I disagree with PETA that medical testing is unnecessary. I realize that in order for the continuing advancement of modern medicine, we need animal testing. I agree with PETA that medical testing is overdone. I visited a primate lab researching the possibility of a genetic link to alcoholism and the effect of alcohol on these individuals. We know certain individuals are predisposed to alcoholism and we know what alcohol does to the body - that research is done, hang it up and look for the next great discovery.
I am a vegetarian for one reason - it would be hypocritical for me to eat meat. I would never kill an animal for food, therefore I will not purchase meat at the grocery store. If I would not kill the animal myself, I can not justify allowing someone else to kill for me. My father-in-law is a hunter. I can't use my vegetarian argument with him. He will kill an animal for food. Therefore it is not hypocritical for him to run to the store and buy meat.
I agree with PETA that the same God that chose to place me on this Earth chose to place my cat on this Earth. I believe that God chose to place both of us here for a reason and I don't pretend to understand God's devine plan and will not speculate as to what His reasons may be. Mostly I believe in being as kind as possible to all creatures. On my judgement day I would rather have our Lord laugh at me for being foolish than punish me for the cruelty I have bestowed upon his non-human creations.
To: dubyas_vision
I am a vegetarian for one reason - it would be hypocritical for me to eat meat. I would never kill an animal for food, therefore I will not purchase meat at the grocery store. If I would not kill the animal myself, I can not justify allowing someone else to kill for me. My father-in-law is a hunter. I can't use my vegetarian argument with him. He will kill an animal for food. Therefore it is not hypocritical for him to run to the store and buy meat. An unexpected argument from a vegetarian. I've used a variation occasionally when someone goes off a me about the cruelty of hunting, while enjoying a hamburger.
I think there are some legitimate health questions involved in some cosmetic and household product testing. Im sure some of it could be avoided, which would be fine with me. Unfortunately, I wouldnt trust PETA at the table to determine where the lines should be drawn.
29
posted on
03/01/2002 5:26:47 PM PST
by
SJackson
To: Libloather
Thanks for the bump, 'more for the grill'... And that is funny? It is just more of the same old tired stuff taking up space. I asked you, basically, for the logic behind such a tired, pointless post at this site. All I get is funny-strange from you. It is more than passingly strange that you would use this forum to point out somthing that we all already know, but it does allow some really lame freepers to re-post some pretty tired stuff as if their thoughts are new, funny, thought-provoking, etc. Get a life - 99.99999999% of freepers have made up their mind on the issue of PETA - who are you trying to motivate or contact? Yourself?
To: grist for the mill
Thanks again for another bump!
To: DoughtyOne; Las Vegas Dave; grist for the mill
"PETA - not as warm and cuddly as you thought..."Check out www.consumerfreedom.com !!
To: Libloather
Man, you are redundant!
To: Libloather
someone suggested to me that they could be prosecuted under RICO. Is that possible?
To: Terriergal
Someone suggested to me that they could be prosecuted under RICO.I believe www.consumerfreedom.com is suing in order to remove PETA's nonprofit status...
To: grist for the mill
Do you eat meat, gristle?
(Oh, and you're very generous with the bumps. Thank you sir, can I have another?)
To: Libloather
I know. It's a start but IMO they should be considered as bad as the mob.
To: Libloather
PETA linked to terrorist organization PETA is a terrorist organization
To: Libloather
Here's another:
Now, don't take this the wrong way, but you are so redundant someone has to show you some light.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-39 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson