Absolutely OT - PETA caught in the act

shelly wrote:

Dear Shelly,

Isn't this an allegation?


*someone* in the
organization had to have either condoned the killing of these animals or
had to be scratching his/her head at the discrepancy in numbers, because
from the article, it sounds like this was an on-going program and that a
large number of animals were involved.

--Marshall

On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 18:34:21 GMT, Marshall Lev Dermer
wrote:

This looks like one:

". it's
also pretty clear that their mission was endorsed by PeTA."

read the sentence after it. from the article, it's clear that the
"rescue from vets/shelters and rehome" mission was endorsed by PeTA.
and it would've been a lovely mission for them to have, as they've
historically done nothing to actually find homes for unwanted animals.
i went on to say that it's unclear, from the article, whether or not
PeTA knew the two individuals were killing animals. i think, though,
that an employer is ultimately responsible for its employees on-duty
actions, whether or not that employer has knowledge of those actions.

--
shelly
http://home.bluemarble.net/~scouvrette || http://cat-sidh.blogspot.com

My ass contemplates those who talk behind my back.
-- Francis Picabia

They were employees of PETA and taking the pets in the name of PETA and
telling the vets they would rehome them. It can't get much clearer than
that. They sure as hell weren't doing what was promised if they had been
they wouldn't have been arrested.

Celeste



"Marshall Lev Dermer" wrote in message
...
shelly wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 15:14:54 GMT, Marshall Lev Dermer
wrote:


Is it fair to use the name "PETA," a name for an entire organization,
when the article only describes the behavior of two persons?


from the article, it looks as though the two individuals were using PeTA
(remember, small e for ethical!) property to commit the crimes. it's
also pretty clear that their mission was endorsed by PeTA. whether or
not PeTA knew the two individuals were killing animals is not known, but
an employer is ultimately responsible for its employees on-duty actions.

it also seems to me that this was unlikely an isolated incident and that
PeTA *had* to know what was going on. if you're sent out to "rescue"
and rehome X number of animals and those animals are killed, surely
*someone* should notice that the animals are not there to be adopted?


Hi Shelly,

PETA is the name of an organization. An organization endorses an
activity when an agency member with appropriate authority endorses/
approves the activity. Look at this:

“We are appalled if this actually happened,” PETA President Ingrid
Newkirk said. “We would absolutely never condone this behavior.”

I'm no fan of PETA but I would be careful in making allegations
about persons/organizations and undesirable/illegal behavior.

--Marshall

Spot wrote:
They were employees of PETA and taking the pets in the name of PETA and
telling the vets they would rehome them. It can't get much clearer than
that.

"Clearer than that" about what? The allegation was that PETA endorsed
(or appeared to endorse)these actions? All of this could have occurred
without an authorized person at PETA endorsing this unfortunate behavior.

As a young teenager, I was riding my bicycle with some friends through
an affluent northern suburb of Chicago. A police officer stopped
us and accused me of calling him a "dirty flatfoot copper." I didn't
even know the meaning of "flatfoot" or "copper." He told us that
he never wanted to see us in Glencoe again. Was this behavior endorsed
by the Glencoe Police Department? I doubt it.

--Marshall

In article G9Mse.4259$EH1.3020@trndny03, Spot wrote:
They were employees of PETA and taking the pets in the name of PETA and
telling the vets they would rehome them. It can't get much clearer than
that.

A few years ago an executive with my company was busted on
something-or-other to do with fraud, and we were all like
"Who is this guy?"

I figure there are Enron-style California energy ripoff
debacles where employees of the company are committing
crimes on behalf of the company, and Dennis Kozlowski-
style corporate fraud debacles where employees of the
company are committing crimes on their own behalf. I'll
believe that the thing in NC is one of the latter if there's
evidence produced to support it, but right now it looks more
like one from Column B.
--
Melinda Shore - Software longa, hardware brevis -

43% of all private-sector jobs created in the US
from 2001 to April 2005 are housing-related

"Spot" wrote in message
news:G9Mse.4259$EH1.3020@trndny03...
They were employees of PETA and taking the pets in the name of PETA and
telling the vets they would rehome them. It can't get much clearer than
that. They sure as hell weren't doing what was promised if they had been
they wouldn't have been arrested.

That doesn't mean that PETA, as an organization, condoned or even knew about
it. I am not a fan of that organization and I certainly wouldn't be shocked
if the organization did know what was happening, but as of yet that's not
been proven.

I've had occasion to dismiss rescue volunteers for doing things under the
name of the rescue that they had no permission to do. I've had more than
one occasion to witness people use a rescue name as some kind of free pass
to do & behave as they pleased, including using the rescue name as some kind
of weapon.

The actions of a few who choose to do things under a corporate or
organizational cloak does not automatically mean said entity was cognizant
or supportive of those actions.

--
Tara

"Marshall Lev Dermer" wrote in message
...
All of this could have occurred
without an authorized person at PETA endorsing this unfortunate behavior.

............Marshall when you're speaking of any organization the buck has to
stop somewhere. Even if the actions weren't authorized by higher-ups, they
need to step up and take full responsibility. In your personal example, no,
I doubt that the police dept. approved the actions of the cop, but they're
still responsible as he's an employee taking action in their name. End of
story. They may or may not have been cognizant of an employee's action, but
the first words I want to hear out of an organization's mouth are *We take
full responsibility.* It tells me what they're made of.

...........I don't think that PETA has any business doing euthanasia. If the
issue was objection to using gas to euthanise pets, they only needed to
provide the proper euthanasia drugs, not step in and do it themselves.
Killing animals with a .22 may socially unacceptable, but is it incredibly
painful? Honestly I don't know. If someone knew what they were doing it
might be the most humane death. There is an essential squeamishness about
being OK with euthanasia as long as it's quiet and polite, but being
repelled by noise and blood that offends me More than one person here has
reported euthanasia gone wrong and the apprearance of suffering, even with
the approved drugs.

If they were actually authorized to do euthanasia for that area there should
have been a proper disposal procedure, not using private dumpsters, which is
illegal in itself. If I dumped my weekly garbage in the McDonald's dumpster
I would be arrested, as this is the same as stealing. This is what makes
this whole thing look fishy, as if it were something they should NOT be
doing.

And here's their take on the overpopulation/shelter problem in NC
http://www.helpinganimals.com/f-nc.asp

It looks to me as if they threw up their hands and said, well, we'll have to
start euthanising to take care of this problem. The facts of the world are
that you cannot stop all cruelty, suffering and injustice. To think you can
or should is messianic. An organization dedicated to making a change should
have stepped back and said, OK, let's see if we can take a different
approach to this as what we are doing is not working to solve the long term
problem. Would this take care of all animals presently suffering in NC?
No, but that shouldn't have been the issue in the first place, because it is
an impossible goal to meet. Their solution was to take over euthanisation,
getting rid of as many pets (oh excuse me, companion animals) as possible.

And this in a nutshell is why I don't like PETA:
http://www.helpinganimals.com/i-nobirth.html
Each and every one of us can make a difference. Please, make a pledge right
now to take personal responsibility, not just for neutering your own
companion animals, but also to neuter or spay every unsterilized animal you
encounter. Is there an unneutered cat hanging around the back porch? Does
your neighbor have an unaltered dog chained up in the yard? Is your coworker
giving away a litter of kittens? Provide information on spaying and
neutering and ask animal guardians when they plan to have the surgery done.
Be persistent. If they make excuses, arrange to have the animals altered
yourself

...........What are they saying here? Take your neighbor's dog and have
him/her neutered? We don't even take kids unless they're in extreme
danger. Their stance is that animals aren't owned, that we don't have the
right to use them for breeding, entertainment, etc. Now tell, me how is
thinking you have the right to sterilize any animal you come across any
different than the idea of owning that pet, excuse me companioni animal.
Seems to me they're still being treated as objects. If you're the kind of
organization that encourages disobedience, you attract people who are
capable of it. In the end we are each responsible for our own actions. One
cannot make someone conform to your idea of how the world should work. If
someone thinks they can, well, I hope they don't live next door to me.

.......And go back to the original url and look at a companion piece on the
daily doings in the offices of PETA. How do you think you would fare
looking at miserable, tortured animals day in and day out and getting the
message of *we have to do something about each and every one of these
situations.*

.......Is there a need to address these problems? Absolutely. But in a
world where people throw babies out of moving vehicles, one shouldn't be
surprised that people mistreat animals. It's not a whole in itself, but a
piece of a whole.

And finally, someone sent me this. Since it is mentioned that it can be
forwarded, I think it's OK to post it. Sorry about the shape it's in, but
my OE is semi-broken.
_____________

Friends -

This is our formal reply to folks inquiring about recent news items. I =
appreciate you all very much, so I'm attaching this below my signature =
vs. sending it to you as my own response. Please forward as you see fit. =
With great respect I must add that this is the last you'll hear from me =
on this topic. My cases are piling higher, and I have to get back to =
work.=20

Warm regards,
Martin=20
From: Martin Mersereau )
-------------------------------------------------------------------------=

Thank you for contacting PETA about the euthanization of dogs and cats =
in North Carolina.=20

It is against PETA's policy to put the bodies of animals in dumpsters, =
and we are appalled that a member of our staff apparently did that. =
There is no excuse for that and, despite the fact that she is a caring =
soul, we have suspended her from work.=20

PETA has always supported and spoken openly about euthanasia. It is =
easy to throw stones at those doing the dirty work for society, but =
euthanasia is a necessary evil until the massive animal overpopulation =
problem can be solved. We invite anyone who can offer a home to any =
animal, pay for one or a hundred spay/neuter surgeries, or persuade =
others not to go to a pet shop or breeder, to please join us in doing =
these things. In the last year, we have spayed/neutered more than 7,600 =
dogs and cats, including feral animals, many free of charge and all =
others at well below our own costs. Support for this program is much =
needed.

To clarify, we do not run an adoption facility, although we do place =
animals, approximately 360 in the last year, despite having run out of =
friends and family members to approach. We are a "shelter of last =
resort," taking in and giving a painless death in loving arms to animals =
who would otherwise have been shot with a .22 or gassed in a windowless =
metal box, which is what happened in North Carolina before PETA offered =
free euthanasia services to agencies there. North Carolina has the =
second highest rate per capita of euthanasia in the country-35 animals =
killed annually for every 1,000 residents-and most do not die a humane =
death. Sadly, the shelters we work with have no adoption programs or =
hours set aside for adoption. At the Bertie County dog shelter, =
residents were throwing unwanted dogs over an 8-foot-high fence, where =
they became infected or injured by other sick or aggressive dogs from =
whom they could not escape. Bertie County also had no facility for cats =
and used to let them go to breed in the woods and fend for themselves =
until PETA built a shelter for them this year. PETA has begged for =
years, through formal proposals and numerous meetings to have the county =
allow PETA to implement an adoption program as part of a larger picture =
of sheltering that would also include a spay neuter program, a humane =
education program, 24/7 emergency services, and rabies clinics.=20

We try never to take in adoptable animals unless we know we have a =
home for them-only those who are mange-covered, have parvovirus, are =
injured, old, unsocialized from life on a chain, or unwanted and for =
whom there are no good homes available. We also work at the roots, =
spending more than $240,000 in one North Carolina county alone, to =
provide shelter in winter for animals left out in the cold, to =
spay/neuter, to get vet care for animals in dire straits, to send Bertie =
County's one animal control officer to professional training, to pay a =
cleaner to maintain two shelters, and much more. =20

We have always outspokenly advocated fixing the problems of =
overpopulation through practical methods. Sadly, those stories don't get =
coverage in the media.=20

We urge you to look closer and do your part to help us help these =
animals. For information and resources on how to do that, visit =
HelpingAnimals.com.=20

Sincerely,
The PETA Staff
PETA.org=2
_____________________
................they try to get animals adopted by pestering family and
friends? Pah.......they're not serious about adoption at all.

buglady
take out the dog before replying

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 03:15:08 GMT, Marshall Lev Dermer
wrote:

"Clearer than that" about what? The allegation was that PETA endorsed
(or appeared to endorse)these actions?

no, that was not the allegation. at least, that wasn't *my* allegation.

Was this behavior endorsed
by the Glencoe Police Department? I doubt it.

unlikely. but, i believe, as the officer's employer, GPD was ultimately
responsible for his on-duty behavior.

--
shelly
http://home.bluemarble.net/~scouvrette || http://cat-sidh.blogspot.com

We have normality. I repeat, we have normality. Anything you still can't
cope with is therefore your own problem.
-- Douglas Adams

Marshall Lev Dermer wrote:


Hi Buglady,

Is it fair to use the name "PETA," a name for an entire organization,
when the article only describes the behavior of two persons?

--Marshall



Marshall,
I believe it is quite fair. Especially when you look back and see
the what the issue is. PETA was recently publicly exposed for killing
more animals, and a far greater percentage of the animals in its care,
than any similar size shelter in the Virginia area. In an effort to
avoid admitting they were still killing animals in thier care it would
appear that they attempted to dump hundreds of dead animals in the
Virginia area. There is a similar case standing in Fairfax County where
over 150 bagged dead animals dumped in a very similar fashion is
currently under investigation. This dumping of animal began AFTER PETA
was publicly exposed for its euthanasia policies.
Remember this is the group that paid out for a convicted arsonist
Rod Coronado legal defense, then supported his trips around the country
where he openly showed people how to rig a bomb out of gasoline and a
one gallon milk jug.
For some stellar reporting and deeper information about the bizzarre
activities of PETA - visit ConsumerFreedom.com website. The data
presented there is sourced and can be tracked back to sources.
http://www.petakillsanimals.com/

Tee wrote:
"Spot" wrote in message
news:G9Mse.4259$EH1.3020@trndny03...
They were employees of PETA and taking the pets in the name of PETA and
telling the vets they would rehome them. It can't get much clearer than
that. They sure as hell weren't doing what was promised if they had been
they wouldn't have been arrested.

That doesn't mean that PETA, as an organization, condoned or even knew about
it. I am not a fan of that organization and I certainly wouldn't be shocked
if the organization did know what was happening, but as of yet that's not
been proven.

As the investigation unfolds I believe it will lead all the way to the
top of the organization. Who bailed the two out of jail? - The head of
PETA. This is a very dangerous organization which openly and vocally
supports ALF whom the FBI has labelled the #1 domestic terrorist
organization in the US.