Disturbing News From Down Under

[JGalanos]

http://www.news.com.au/entertainment/story/0,28383,25893136-5013560,00.html

 

[Mr Barguzin]

*GGGGGGGGGGGGGGRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR* unrepresentative Swill of untold stupidity.

 

Rabbits are feral menaces in Oz, as are red foxes, not to furget feral dogs and cats. Just ask farmers.... and we do actually have a "rabbit proof fence" in Oz.

 

That group of automatons should be sent 'back of bourke' and given a taste of the real Australia.

 

*muttering under breath as return to burrow*

[White Fox]

Actually I hate to see it happen to anyone, but maybe it is good news re these crackpots. They obviously did that while at the same time saying that they didn't, playing both ends of the stick. But maybe after doing a few things like that both governments and people will realize the type of useless morons that most of these folks are. Yes, some are just dedicated to a cause that they believe in. But by far the most are either leaders or little sheep following the leaders around doing what they say without thinking.

 

Also just noticed that Mr B had made a comment with the real truth just before me here, just before I posted this...

 

Probably a good thing actually to see some of this stuff. Maybe it w ill wake people up!

 

P.S. Hey, Mr B. Maybe you should bring back Quigley to shoot rabbits this time!

[Worker 11811]

I kind of agree with WF. This might turn out to be a good thing if we don't get so upset about it.

It simply strengthens our position.

 

WE know that PeTA is a fringe group even if others think they are legitimate. WE know that they are hypocrites. WE know that they are little more than a home-grown terrorist organization.

 

If this can be brought to the forefront and we can show people what PeTA is really like, we can bring them down.

 

The position is very simple. We just say, "If you don't like fur it is your right to decide but if you align yourself with PeTA you are aligning yourself with terrorists."

 

If PeTA does not deny association with the person or persons who made that threat... and QUICKLY... they stand to become labeled as a terrorist organization by the FBI and the Dept. of Homeland Security. They were ALREADY investigated for terrorism by the FBI but they didn't find the "smoking gun" evidence that is needed to prosecute this kind of case. They tabled the investigation. But, if the FBI, et. al., have reason to believe there is a credible threat, either by PeTA or in the name of PeTA, that investigation will be resumed.

 

Therefore, it is in our best interest to calmly point out this incident and to make sure people know about it.

We need to show how unseemly those people really are. We need to separate people from PeTA and turn them into a laughing stock. (That they really are.)

 

Again, we need to make it clear that this argument is NOT about fur. If people don't like fur that's okay with me.

The last time I checked we still lived in a free country. People have the right to make up their own minds.

 

We need to make it clear that this argument is against PeTA and the lies, hypocrisies and terrorism that is perpetrated in their name.

 

P.S. @ Mr. B --

I'm in the process of building a .223 cal. rifle that will shoot the flies of a cow's ass at 200 yards or more.

I'd love to make a trip to Oz so I could set up along the rabbit fence and test out my new rifle when I'm done building it.

If we can find a place to sell the pelts I'll split the proceeds 50/50.

[MrC1946]

White Fox is correct. This eposode serves to expose the real nature of these people and therefore hasten their demise.

[JGalanos]

They are little more than a home-grown terrorist organization.

 

Had never really thought of them that way before ... But you do have a point!

[Worker 11811]

Just Google on the phrase, "peta fbi".

 

At least 6 of the top 10 links I got from my search, just a minute ago, came up with some very compelling stories.

Among them are The Washington Post, The New York Times and CNN.

Some of them are talking about it because they believe the FBI is invading the people's privacy but even those articles make it clear that the FBI has been investigating PeTA since the year 2000 or before.

 

Regardless of your stance on the issue, it is clear that the FBI has seen fit to put PeTA on its "watch list."

 

I've been reading around on this for some time. From what I've read, the FBI doesn't have enough evidence to continue the investigation so the case has been tabled. However, they say that they reserve the right to reopen the investigation if they find more evidence.

 

If somebody actually gets hurt in this latest incident, I am pretty sure the FBI will reopen the case.

[Guest]

I was involved in "anti" animal rights protests while a grad student at Berkeley. We would argue that anmal research benefits all, including at times, animals. I have also had to take course on how to appropriately handle animals (something that came out of animal rights activists). I don't disagree with the class, I actually gained quite a bit. One interesting tidbit of information was the distribution of animal use in the U.S. Well over 90% of animal use in the U.S. is for food, the next greatest animal use is for hunting (~5+%), then biomedical research (~3-4%), follwed by "other" (pets??), then finally fur which did not even register a bar on a bar graph (less than 1% of all animal use in the U.S.).

 

We can rationalize all we want (e.g. it's our choice to wear what we want). It represents VERY LITTLE overall animal use, etc. However as a friend of mine pointed out we'll never win the arguement because you can't argue emotion with logic.

 

Bottome line is we just have go on with our pursuit of happiness...

 

My $0.02 (which is probably all it's worth).

Edited June 11, 2011 by Guest

[Worker 11811]

We can rationalize all we want (e.g. it's our choise to wear what we want). It represents VERY LITTLE overall animal use, etc. However as a friend of mine pointed out we'll never win the arguement because you can't argue emotion with logic.

 

You're absolutely right! On both counts!

 

You've seen me make this argument before. We can't let people frame the debate in terms of emotion. If we do, we've lost. We have to keep the argument on OUR turf. The turf where logic and information rule.

 

The number of animals killed for fur is a PITTANCE compared to the animals that die for other reasons. They will take one small issue such as this and blow it up. They make mountains out of molehills.

 

This threat by PeTA is a chance to show the world just how weird they are!

 

Did you know that Ingrid Newkirk wants to have her body dissected when she dies and have her skin made into leather? She wants to send one of her eyeballs to the director of the E.P.A! She's downright macabre!... A f*ckin' loony!

It's right on her website! This can be a wedge if we use it right.

 

This latest threat to kill people who use fur is a great place to start. In this case, we have the law on our side. And, if it ever comes to reality, PeTA will be outlaws.

 

This is our chance to take a big bite out of PeTA's influence.

 

Number One: Do not let them frame the argument in terms of emotion. When they say that animals die for fur, just say, "Yes." Ignore their "passionate plea". Tell them that an argument can't be made from a platform with only a single plank.

 

Number Two: Show them how PeTA are outlaws. Show them the FBI files. Show them the connections to the ALF and the ELF, both of which have killed or threatened the lives of people. They are terrorists, as defined by the FBI and the Dept. of Homeland Security. Domestic terrorism is a much greater threat than any Islamist extremist group!

 

Number Three: Show them how weird and outlandish PeTA are. Show them the "Dumpster Case" where PeTA employees were caught red-handed, killing puppies and kittens and throwing their carcasses into a dumpster. Show them Ingrid's will and let them see how freakin' off-the-wall she really is.

 

Finally, be sure to tell them that this argument is NOT simply about fur. Tell them that they don't have to like fur if they don't want to. Just make it clear that this is about PeTA and not about fur.

 

If they don't like fur, they can still say anything they want against it. This is NOT an effort to stop people from expressing their beliefs. This is simply meant to show people that PeTA is not the do-good organization that many people think they are.

 

Regardless of whether the FBI continues the investigation, PeTA is a terrorist organization. They just haven't been caught yet.

[Guest]

I would like to remind folks that one of the main reasons for the levy failures in New Orleans (Katrina) was due to Nutria undermining them.

 

There has been a long standing continuous legal 'shoot' going on for decades there for Nutria. Why are they not trapped?

 

The answer of course is the PC argument put forth by the animal rights folks over the "inhumane" treatment of trapping. We are talking about millions of Nutria per year creating this fiasco. The trappers should be hired since it is the most effective way to environmentally safely get rid of large numbers of these kinds of numbers.

 

It is the actions and "promotions" of the animal activist that interfere with a number of the more rational options that are available.

 

As I've said before, the Nutria of New Orleans could provide a fur spread and car seat covers for every bed and car in America.

 

The inhumanity is for all to see in the disaster that fell on New Orleans with Katrina and the Nutria played a major role.

 

OFF

[Guest]

Another thought as an extension of what I wrote earlier. First what is the difference between a steak and a fur coat (this is not a joke...I'm not funny). You can see the fur but you can't see the steak after it is used. Why are people so upset about fur?? Because they can see it.

 

The thing is, if we eliminated the entire fur industry in the U.S., how much animal use would be left? Over 99%. So it begs the question: how much of an impact would PeTA have made? Hardly anything!

 

Again, my $0.02.

[Worker 11811]

Furless,

 

Your "two cents" is worth about a buck and a half!

 

The only thing I can possibly add to what you say is that fur bearers often look cute and cuddly whereas cows and pigs are "dirty" animals that few people really care about. Then, as you say, the end product of fur is something that people can see and appreciate for years afterward. The end product of animals used for food production goes down the toilet!

 

Rabbit fur is one that I bring up quite often.

Many people use rabbits for food. So, what should we do with all that rabbit fur? Throw it away?

Why not tan it and use it for something worthwhile?

If we used more rabbits for food, we'd have lots of good meat to eat and lots of nice, soft fur to wear!

 

That's a bargain in anybody's book!

[Furbabe]

PETA = People for Extortion, Terrorism, and Anarchy. I'd love to see that on a tee shirt.