Log In | Register
CASH
In my other life I am a Formula One race car driver who solves mysteries on TV
Articles Posted: 107; Links Seeded: 1010
Member Since: 8/2006
Member Since: 8/2006
19 Votes
29 Comments
PETA foes salivate at cruelty trial
News Type: Event — Seeded on Wed Jan 24, 2007 10:48 AM EST
Article Source: NewsObserver.comadvertisement
Kristin Collins, Staff Writer
WINTON - All around this struggling farm town, chicken houses stand in the fields as a testament to the way many here earn their living -- raising, slaughtering and processing chickens.
It is an unlikely locale for an unlikely criminal case. Today, two employees of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, a radical animal-rights group that opposes meat-eating, are on trial for the strangest of charges: killing animals.
PETA is based in Norfolk, Va., but its work has international scope. The group, which raises more than $25 million a year from 1.6 million supporters, opposes any human use of animals, whether for food, fashion or research. In the more than two decades since its founding, it has become a major threat to medical researchers, meatpackers, fur sellers and others.
Now, two of its employees stand accused of tossing garbage bags full of euthanized cats and dogs into a Dumpster behind a Piggly Wiggly in Hertford County, 130 miles northeast of Raleigh.
Adria J. Hinkle and Andrew B. Cook, both of whom work in PETA's Norfolk office, are charged with 21 counts each of animal cruelty, a felony that can carry prison time, along with littering and obtaining property by false pretenses.
It is a strange turn of events for PETA. The group's supporters have often been prosecuted for their radical efforts to protect animals -- breaking into fashion shows to throw blood on fur-wearing models, liberating lab animals, showing gory videos outside the circus -- but PETA has never been accused of hurting animals.
Published to:
- Cash's Column, All of Newsvine
- Groups: none
- Regions: none
- Public Discussion (29)
What's this?
Who's leading the conversation?
This visualization below allows you to see the impact that each user
has on the current conversation.
The top row contains the group of users who have had the most impact, the 2nd
row the group of users who have had the 2nd most impact (et cetera).
Users with similar impact are grouped together, and the average score of the group
is shown to the left of the group. The author of the article is also shown on the
left, in their corresponding group.
Each user's score is based on the number of comments the user has made plus the
number of votes their comments have received. The scores are calculated relative
one another, so while their absolute value is not particularly important, their
relative difference does indicate a larger difference in impact on the conversation.
17
5.0
{"commentId":492152,"authorDomain":"scientificblog"}
A headline with the word 'salivate' in the trial of a guy named 'Cook' about animals? This writer is so funny she must be a scientist.
{"commentId":492152,"threadId":"70630","contentId":"535346","authorDomain":"scientificblog"}
- 3 votes
#1 - Wed Jan 24, 2007 10:49 AM EST{"commentId":492652,"authorDomain":"indecent"}
I think this is hilarious.
PETA gives a bad name to animal rights activists that aren't complete fanatics.
{"commentId":492652,"threadId":"70630","contentId":"535346","authorDomain":"indecent"}
- 4 votes
#2 - Wed Jan 24, 2007 2:40 PM EST{"commentId":492675,"authorDomain":"scientificblog"}
There aren't many activist organizations* that haven't, at some point, been taken over by crazy people who make them look bad. This happens everywhere, of course, and animal protection can't be condemned because of a few PETA employees any more than religion can be condemned because some pederasts decided to become priests.
In both instances it's what the organizations decided to do when they found out that is the issue. PETA had a chance to step up and do the right thing and instead closed ranks and the PETA spokesperson said, "Euthanasia is a better alternative to sitting in a stinking pound" - which leads me to believe most animals would rather not have PETA on their side today.
*Nature Conservancy is still pretty good. On the scale of money well spent compared to PETA, Greenpeace, Sierra Club, Environmental Defense, etc. they are tops
{"commentId":492675,"threadId":"70630","contentId":"535346","authorDomain":"scientificblog"}
- 6 votes
{"commentId":492766,"authorDomain":"indecent"}
PETA kills some 70% of the animals they rescue and their president maintains that all animals should be given the same rights as human beings. Thats mean its not just "a few PETA employees" its the basis of their organization.
But there have been changes going on lately at PETA...one can only hope that they get it back from the crazies and go back to being reputable.
{"commentId":492766,"threadId":"70630","contentId":"535346","authorDomain":"indecent"}
- 4 votes
{"commentId":493184,"authorDomain":"jimi"}
There aren't many activist organizations* that haven't, at some point, been taken over by crazy people who make them look bad.
The difference here is that PETA was founded by the crazy people who run it.
{"commentId":493184,"threadId":"70630","contentId":"535346","authorDomain":"jimi"}
- 3 votes
{"commentId":493433,"authorDomain":"djehuty"}
You're making a lot of sense, Cash. Good to hear the voice of reason :)
{"commentId":493433,"threadId":"70630","contentId":"535346","authorDomain":"djehuty"}
- 4 votes
{"commentId":492738,"authorDomain":"rimuladas"}
When is PETA going to be considered a terrorist group?
{"commentId":492738,"threadId":"70630","contentId":"535346","authorDomain":"rimuladas"}
- 4 votes
#3 - Wed Jan 24, 2007 3:22 PM EST{"commentId":493270,"authorDomain":"janeway77"}
Are these the guys that throw blood on folks wearing leather and fur? If so, I'd say that is pretty "terrorist", wouldn't you?
{"commentId":493270,"threadId":"70630","contentId":"535346","authorDomain":"janeway77"}
- 3 votes
{"commentId":493407,"authorDomain":"jimi"}
Even more than that, they have ties to groups that firebomb research facilities that test on animals. Now THAT is pretty terrorist.
{"commentId":493407,"threadId":"70630","contentId":"535346","authorDomain":"jimi"}
- 4 votes
{"commentId":493319,"authorDomain":"JeezyChreezy"}
Well, crazy though they may be, a lot of good is done, too. And, not that it's the same thing, but people thought abolitionists and suffragettes and civil rights crusaders were crazy, too.
And, before you throw red paint on me, I'm just saying that history may shine a different light on animal activists.
I dig on the compassion factor, but bacon. Oh, man... bacon.
{"commentId":493319,"threadId":"70630","contentId":"535346","authorDomain":"JeezyChreezy"}
- 3 votes
#4 - Wed Jan 24, 2007 8:42 PM EST{"commentId":493368,"authorDomain":"scientificblog"}
I agree some animals should be exempted from PETA protests ... and yummy bacon is at the top of that list.
Secretly, I bet they eat it too. After all, they're killing dogs and cats and claim they are against that also.
{"commentId":493368,"threadId":"70630","contentId":"535346","authorDomain":"scientificblog"}
- 4 votes
{"commentId":493594,"authorDomain":"ignoblus"}
they're killing dogs and cats and claim they are against that also
Actually, they don't. Few people know anything about what PETA believes in.
{"commentId":493594,"threadId":"70630","contentId":"535346","authorDomain":"ignoblus"}
- 3 votes
{"commentId":493601,"authorDomain":"JeezyChreezy"}
Point of interest: Bacon is not an animal.
But, oh, to live in a world filled with roaming herds of hickory-smoked goodness.
(I heard once that bacon is the No. 1 downfall of vegetarians.)
{"commentId":493601,"threadId":"70630","contentId":"535346","authorDomain":"JeezyChreezy"}
- 4 votes
{"commentId":493965,"authorDomain":"scientificblog"}
You're right. Most of these comments are written in 3 seconds between real work so I can't always vouch for the accuracy of my taxonomy. I looked it up and bacon is indeed not an animal.
I have heard that about vegetarians too ... it must be the free-range, organic bacon that does them in.
{"commentId":493965,"threadId":"70630","contentId":"535346","authorDomain":"scientificblog"}
- 2 votes
{"commentId":494000,"authorDomain":"ignoblus"}
I'm a vegetarian. Although I (would imagine I'd still) like the taste of bacon, it's been no problem going without it.
Most people in the world do not value life anywhere near as much as they say they do. Just get them talking about euthanasia, and you'll see that. When PETA say they are in favor animal rights, they don't necessarily mean that animals have an unequivocal right (or desire) to live under any circumstances, just like most people wouldn't really say that about humans. This isn't necessarily PETA being hypocritical, just that their position is misunderstood.
Now, yes, they are more extreme than I am, but their arguments make a lot more sense than most people give them credit for. I do think they go too far sometimes, but I really cringe at PETA bashing.
{"commentId":494000,"threadId":"70630","contentId":"535346","authorDomain":"ignoblus"}
- 2 votes
{"commentId":494035,"authorDomain":"scientificblog"}
I agree about bashing - but PETA brought this one on themselves. The obvious stance was to say, 'they screwed up, we love animals' not ""Euthanasia is a better alternative to sitting in a stinking pound."
Because if PETA will insist I can't make a value judgment on an animal, like eating one, they certainly can't make a value judgment to kill one and throw it in a dumpster.
{"commentId":494035,"threadId":"70630","contentId":"535346","authorDomain":"scientificblog"}
- 1 vote
{"commentId":494065,"authorDomain":"ignoblus"}
Because if PETA will insist I can't make a value judgment on an animal, like eating one, they certainly can't make a value judgment to kill one and throw it in a dumpster.
There's a huge difference behind the reasoning in these cases though. They killed these animals (wrongly, in my view, if that needs to be said) for the sake of the animals. You eat animals for your own sake. They are trying to be generous (even if they fail at it), you aren't.
{"commentId":494065,"threadId":"70630","contentId":"535346","authorDomain":"ignoblus"}
- 2 votes
{"commentId":494071,"authorDomain":"tigerblade"}
I looked it up and bacon is indeed not an animal.
you may have looked it up, but you're wrong. because i bet you looked it up in a book. I looked it up in my gut and my gut says you're wrong.
I think I might go bacon hunting this week. They're tricky little devils to catch.
with sincerest apologies to the master, stephen colbert
{"commentId":494071,"threadId":"70630","contentId":"535346","authorDomain":"tigerblade"}
- 2 votes
{"commentId":494471,"authorDomain":"scientificblog"}
They killed these animals (wrongly, in my view, if that needs to be said) for the sake of the animals. You eat animals for your own sake. They are trying to be generous (even if they fail at it), you aren't.
ignoblus, if motivations let us make those kinds of value judgments then religious fundamentalists have a much stronger argument than you otherwise might think they have.
tigerblade, I can't argue with Colbert. I won't even try. If he tells me he is the King of Rome I would probably just walk away muttering, "I guess he really IS the King of Rome."
{"commentId":494471,"threadId":"70630","contentId":"535346","authorDomain":"scientificblog"}
- 1 vote
{"commentId":493516,"authorDomain":"jasonford"}
It's been a while, but I would like to renew my call to join my new group: PAPETA (People Against the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals).
{"commentId":493516,"threadId":"70630","contentId":"535346","authorDomain":"jasonford"}
- 1 vote
#5 - Wed Jan 24, 2007 11:09 PM EST{"commentId":493538,"authorDomain":"scientificblog"}
Do we get to eat stuff???
{"commentId":493538,"threadId":"70630","contentId":"535346","authorDomain":"scientificblog"}
- 1 vote
{"commentId":493544,"authorDomain":"jasonford"}
We will be serving anything containing meat at all official meetings. I move we make Ted Nugent our honorary chairperson in homage to his cookbook "Kill it and Grill it."
{"commentId":493544,"threadId":"70630","contentId":"535346","authorDomain":"jasonford"}
- 1 vote
{"commentId":493555,"authorDomain":"scientificblog"}
At last. I have been staring at this blank spot next to my mashed potatoes and gravy and thinking, 'boy I wish I knew what to put there.'
If it's good enough for the Motor City Madman it's good enough for me(at).
{"commentId":493555,"threadId":"70630","contentId":"535346","authorDomain":"scientificblog"}
- 2 votes
{"commentId":493934,"authorDomain":"PeteZaHutt"}
I like the acronym - P.E.T.A. People Eating Tasty Animals
{"commentId":493934,"threadId":"70630","contentId":"535346","authorDomain":"PeteZaHutt"}
- 2 votes
{"commentId":493938,"authorDomain":"icarus4586"}
I've always liked the counter group, People for the Eating of Tasty Animals.
{"commentId":493938,"threadId":"70630","contentId":"535346","authorDomain":"icarus4586"}
- 2 votes
{"commentId":493941,"authorDomain":"icarus4586"}
Well darnit, Pete's comment wasn't there when I started mine...
{"commentId":493941,"threadId":"70630","contentId":"535346","authorDomain":"icarus4586"}
- 2 votes
{"commentId":493616,"authorDomain":"kerchenko"}
its a conspiracy ! :)
{"commentId":493616,"threadId":"70630","contentId":"535346","authorDomain":"kerchenko"}
- 2 votes
#6 - Thu Jan 25, 2007 12:19 AM EST{"commentId":500201,"authorDomain":"lucidweyland"}
I hope PETA loses and the charges stick, and the resulting damage is enough to cause the organization to go down hard. I don't really want PETA to exist at this point, they are a problem for people who want to help animas.
{"commentId":500201,"threadId":"70630","contentId":"535346","authorDomain":"lucidweyland"}
- 1 vote
#7 - Mon Jan 29, 2007 12:58 AM EST{"commentId":722016,"authorDomain":"GPH"}
"There's a huge difference behind the reasoning in these cases though. They killed these animals (wrongly, in my view, if that needs to be said) for the sake of the animals. You eat animals for your own sake. They are trying to be generous (even if they fail at it), you aren't."
Yes we do eat animals for our "own sake" so what we do it to survive just like the vegetarians and vegans kill plants (plants do live and if they live there is no doubt they feel pain )
about for the sake of the animals "The path to hell is paved with good intention" though I am not religious
{"commentId":722016,"threadId":"70630","contentId":"535346","authorDomain":"GPH"}
- 1 vote
#8 - Mon May 21, 2007 5:05 AM EDT{"canLink":false,"threadId":"70630","isPrivate":false}
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |
As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
Start Tracking
Stop TrackingCOMPANY STUFF:
LEGAL STUFF:
- © 2005-2009 Newsvine, Inc. |
- Newsvine® is a registered trademark of Newsvine, Inc. |
- Newsvine is a property of
