Earendil Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 WASHINGTON DC – Today the nonprofit Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF) published documents online showing that People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) killed 95 percent of the adoptable pets in its care during 2008. Despite years of public outrage over its euthanasia program, the animal rights group kills an average of 5.8 pets every day at its Norfolk, VA headquarters. According to public records from the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, PETA killed 2,124 pets last year and placed only seven in adoptive homes. Since 1998, a total of 21,339 dogs and cats have died at the hands of PETA workers. Despite having a $32 million budget, PETA does not operate an adoption shelter. PETA employees make no discernible effort to find homes for the thousands of pets they kill every year. Last year, the Center for Consumer Freedom petitioned Virginia’s State Veterinarian to reclassify PETA as a slaughterhouse. CCF Research Director David Martosko said: “PETA hasn’t slowed down its hypocritical killing machine one bit, but it keeps browbeating the rest of society with a phony ‘animal rights’ message. What about the rights of the thousands of dogs, cats, puppies, and kittens that die in PETA’s headquarters building?” Martosko added: “Since killing pets is A-OK with PETA, why should anyone listen to their demands about eating meat, using lab rats for medical research, or taking children to the circus?” CCF obtained PETA’s “Animal Record” filings since 1998 from the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. Members of the public can see these documents at PetaKillsAnimals.com. (Skeptical? Click here to see the documents.) In addition to exposing PETA’s hypocritical record of killing defenseless animals, the Center for Consumer Freedom has publicized the animal rights group’s ties to violent activists, and shed light on its aggressive message-marketing to children. The Center for Consumer Freedom is a nonprofit coalition supported by restaurants, food companies, and consumers, working together to promote personal responsibility and protect consumer choices. Source Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Worker 11811 Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 You know, my position has been developing into one that is more and more against PeTA, specifically PeTA and less against people who claim to be for "animal rights" in general. I don't care if you are for or against fur. I don't care if you are for or against eating meat. I don't care if you are for or against using leather or whether you are for or against animal testing. Whatever your belief, I don't care. However, no matter what the individual belief about these subjects, it is important that we are all AGAINST PeTA! We need to show people what a f***ed up organization PeTA is and that they are a bunch of money-grubbing hypocrites! I think more and more people are realizing this. That's why I think it's more important than ever to make sure the anti-PeTA message gets heard. It sort of seems weird to think that somebody who is pro-fur might stand on the same side of a picket line as somebody who is anti-fur but I think it is a possibility if we are all Anti-PeTA! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Fox Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 Yet - and this is a question and not a statement - "Do they not still get money from the US Government for their programs?" Also, it is totally confusing how people could hear this and still send them endless amounts of money! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 WF; Yes they do when they should be on the Domestic Terrorist list near the top, right behind the ALF. On top of it, flowing from her, it's founder is a terrorist radical if ever there was one. Calling to terrorist actions by innuendo and subtle threats, her lackeys jump to her calling. OFF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FurLoverinFL Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 95%!?!?! I think congratulations might be in order... that may actually be down from the percentage of their animals that they've killed in years past. FLinFL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now