PETA Investigation Victory

This is a placeholder text
Group text

by geordiegaviino on 20 September 2010 - 12:09

I didnt say they are right or wrong but i am saying that they did a great deal of good by showing the world what the Lab was doing. Yes there are other organisations but none of them got to this lab before peta and it was peta who outed the lab not another organisation.

I didnt say i plan to fund them, join them or even accept all their choices. I am talking about this one case and this one case only!

I also think your all doing a one sided argument. Your all labeling the bad stuff instead of even considering accepting that they have helped these animals. Some of these animals were bred by breeders. How did these animals leave a breeders "love" and end up in a lab? I dont think it was the breeders fault but someone had to sign that dog over to the science world!

I get where your all coming from but i have the right to praise them when i see fit :)

by GSDtravels on 20 September 2010 - 14:09

Geordie, you're just too far gone to hear what anyone is saying. Their whole goal is to change thinking. They are very good at bringing the worst case scenarios to public attention so that they can garner support and make it SEEM like they have done some good. What they do behind closed doors can rival any bad that any lab has done. WAKE UP! You're buying their BS hook, line and sinker. You certainly do have much to learn and you would do well researching instead of attempting to justify your position and the "good" that they have done. That's like saying that a child molester/murderer helped an old lady cross a busy road, without looking at the crimes that same person commited against innocents.

by geordiegaviino on 20 September 2010 - 14:09

"That's like saying that a child molester/murderer helped an old lady cross a busy road" - That comment says it all doesnt it. Personally i think a child molesterer is much worse than a murderer but thats for a total different debate. To say i would overlook a child molesters crimes is disgusting when you dont even know me. How do i come off as the type of person who would protect the actions of child molester?

"You certainly do have much to learn" - When it comes to choosing the right puppy etc... i do but when it comes to my own personal opinions i have nothing to learn. You cant teach someone how to think i dont believe in them but i dont think they are this great evil. If they are given these animals then it is their buisness if they prefer to put them down than rather than re-home them just like it is a breeders buisness if he chooses put down a puppy with the wrong colour instead of finding that puppy a pet only home. They are in the right of the law and you cant pick and choose who is right or wrong when so many of you justify killing puppies that would make perfect pets. Not that am saying gsdtravels believes in the killing of healthy dogs but how can you call them but not call the breeders that claim they do the same thing on this site.

by Phil Behun on 20 September 2010 - 14:09

Didn't you promise to go away??? Do the rest of the "dog lovers" on this sight a favor and go preach your PETA crap somewhere else, you have nothing to offer here.

by TessJ10 on 20 September 2010 - 16:09

geordiegaviino writes: "After doing a little googling and yes some of their words can be manipulating into sounding like they mean there should be laws to stop all ownership but i aint found a quote that says that"

I shall then help you.

This is important. "Manipulating" Peta quotes? No.way. Straight from the horse's mouth, geordie:

"In a perfect world, all other than human animals would be free
of human interference, and dogs and cats would be part of the
ecological scheme." --PeTA's Statement on Companion Animals.

"[A]s the surplus of cats and dogs declined, eventually companion
animals would be phased out, and we would return to a more
symbiotic relationship--enjoyment at a distance." --Ingrid
Newkirk, "Just Like Us? Toward a Notion of Animal Rights"
(symposium), Harper's, August 1988, p. 50.

"The bottom line is that people don't have the right to
manipulate or to breed dogs and cats ... If people want toys,
they should buy inanimate objects. If they want companionship,
they should seek it with their own kind," -- Ingrid Newkirk,
national director, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals
(PeTA), Animals,< May/June 1993.

"You don't have to own squirrels and starlings to get enjoyment
>from them ... One day, we would like an end to pet shops and the
breeding of animals. [Dogs] would pursue their natural lives in
the wild .. they would have full lives, not wasting at home for
someone to come home in the evening and pet them and then sit
there and watch TV," -- Ingrid Newkirk, national director, People
for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PeTA), Chicago Daily
Herald, March 1, 1990.

Want more? There's hundreds of 'em.

Peta is anti-animal. Period.

www.petakillsanimals.com

by 4pack on 20 September 2010 - 17:09

Yeah cuzz my cats and dogs can really fend for themselves in the wild. Such a better life, being eaten by a eagle or bear. Being scared shitless, after being turned out to slowly starve. Yelled at by humans to stay away when they want back in society, for a bite to eat and warm comforts of a bed to sleep upon. I'm pretty sure my fat cats would rather stay with me and my dogs too.

I can kind of see PETA's and HSUA point, I don't like to see horses in box stalls 24/7 or dogs in puppy mill cages either or even tiny teacup dogs dressed up like babies. But there is a right and wrong way to handle our animals, throwing them to the wild is just at the other end of the spectrum, waaaay too far to the other side. Something in the middle is what domestic animals were intended for. Domestic animals are just that, they require human intervention for survival.

You'd have to go as far back as cavemen to do what PETA has in mind. Then again, what cavemen ate soy and tofu? Don't kick that bear out of his cave, to home yourself Mr. Caveman.

by geordiegaviino on 20 September 2010 - 21:09

I was not defending their views! I was informing you of a lab that was shown to be nothing but hell for the animals living there that it was forced to close it doors.

I can agree with Peta's work when it came to this lab but i dont know much about them as whole and i dont really care :) It like the bible you like certain bits (that please you) and just ignore the rest without even considering it. I was just pointing out one good piece of work they did i wasnt and dont plan to study their work and waste my life when it comes to an organisation.

by Phil Behun on 20 September 2010 - 14:09
Posts: 556
Joined: Fri May 04, 2007 01:43 am
Didn't you promise to go away??? Do the rest of the "dog lovers" on this sight a favor and go preach your PETA crap somewhere else, you have nothing to offer here.

Once i relised i would be leaving the ~~d*cks~~ like you to be nasty to who the hell you liked. I thought "Will i ~~f*ck~~ let the world think that this site only has one sided thinking and i will make a stand for myself and express my personal opinions without feeling like am destroying something which am clearly not" Other words i wont be bullied out by a bunch of people who hide behind a computer screen eating sweets knowing that they cant be touched 'cause the protection of the internet :) If that is too hard for you to understand am calling you a waste of space in a nice way :) and am also making a slight remark that you proberly neglect the real world around. Also am actually also stating if you read through the lines that i think that you have so little self acceptance that you have to attack people on the net to make you feel a little bit bigger but in the real world your a nobody and not one person could give a damn about what you have to say. Hence why you come on this site to speak out!

by Phil Behun on 21 September 2010 - 12:09

Who's hiding?

by Doberdoodle on 21 September 2010 - 23:09

I am glad the lab was exposed, so it's not your fault for posting that... But you should know, Geordie, that while it may appear they are doing good things, they are a borderline terrorist organization, they are allied with ALF, who IS classified as a terrorist threat by Homeland Security. These are the type of people, who if a gun was being held to their head and they had to kill a human or an animal, would kill the human. They are exploiters. They will exploit anything for their cause- the Haulocaust, the murder of an abortion doctor, racism, foolish celebrities- anything. In the documentary "I am an Animal" about Ingrid Newkirk, they vandalized the Jean Paul Gautier store by throwing red paint all over inside and outside the store because they sold fur-- that is illegal. They break the law to do what they want. Worst of all, they give a bad name to animal welfare advocates who are labeled "crazy" like them. There is a right way to go about things, and a wrong way. PETA is the wrong way. The abolitionist point of view is that no animals should be kept by humans, and PETA makes their plan very clear: spay and neuter, euthanize the pets in shelters, do not breed, until there are none.

Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top

PETA Investigation Victory - Page 2

Pedigree Database