Bane of Companies, PETA Spy Reveals Self

[sintax]

May 30, 7:49 PM EDT


Bane of Companies, PETA Spy Reveals Self

By BONNIE PFISTER
Associated Press Writer

TRENTON, N.J. (AP) -- Lisa Leitten is finished living her double life. For the past three years, the soft-spoken, 30-year old moved from Missouri to Texas to Virginia, applying for jobs at businesses dealing with animals. She gave her real name, and some real details about herself: a master's degree in animal psychology and prior work at a primate sanctuary in Florida.

What she didn't reveal was that she was also working for an animal welfare organization, and that she wore a hidden camera to document instances in which animals were treated with what she calls horrific neglect and cruelty.

Leitten called her last assignment for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals her most wrenching: nine months in a Virginia lab owned by Princeton, N.J.-based biomedical firm Covance Co. There, she says, monkeys were denied medical care and abused by technicians. The company denies the claims, says it treats the animals properly and has accused Leitten of illegally working under cover.

<snip>

She says she watched animals suffer with festering wounds, and that tubes were forced into their sinuses for research medicine to be administered, causing them to scream, bleed and vomit. Monkeys were housed alone in cages that were hosed down with the animals still inside, dripping and shivering, she said.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/P/PETA_SPY?SITE=NYITH&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

[BrklynLiberal]

1. It takes a lot of courage and a strong heart and stomach to do this.

I admire her strength and tenacity. I hate the people who are cruel to animals. They should be punished by having exactly the same thing they do to animals inflicted on them.

[Triana]

2. Agreed...

....I'm not crazy about some of PETA's tactics but I am supportive of protecting animals and catching the lying shitheads who abuse them, even if it means working undercover to do it. I couldn't do what she did. I couldn't stomach it. I'm thankful there are people like her who can do this type of work. It's important.

Who was it that said that true morality of a country is determined by how its animals are treated? Ours, then, is pretty damn bad and it's not because there are gays trying to get married - it's because humans still abuse animals like this and somehow think it's justified or try to lie about it or cover it up. Now, THAT is sick.

Gay marriage? Big friggin deal. It's a non-issue (or should be) and all the attention being diverted to what gays do or don't do is just that - a diversion to keep the attention off of what the real moral issues are in this country: poverty, abuse of animals and decimation of their habitat, desecration of the environment for profit, and complete lack of healthcare, just to name a few.

[BrklynLiberal]

10. Well said.

[flvegan]

91. Gandhi said it.

"The greatness of a country can be measured by the way it treats its animals."
-- Mahatma Gandhi

[Catchawave]

53. This was a featured article on the AOL home page today...

...with a poll. At the time I read it there was over 45.000 votes and 62% supported PETA's undercover investigators are helpful in learning the truth about animal cruelties.

That's a much better approval rating than our current administration!

[OKthatsIT]

3. Make sure you send money into ACLU and NLG

The Criminal Syndicate, or the Bush Admin, whichever you prefer, is going after these good people.

[Catchawave]

59. Opposing Compassion Links....

Anti-animal rights websites listed. They smell like the anti-DU websites:

http://www.animalinks.net/links/opposition.html

[roguevalley]

4. This is why I cannot condemn PETA like some. It takes steel balls

for an animal lover or any kind of decent person to go and do this work. They did it to KFC and they did it to these guys. She is my hero and God will remember her goodness. Fuck the bastards who hurt animals.

[lakeguy]

5. sick F@#$s! and the part about "noble ends" don't justify the means.

to who? the monkeys or other animals abused? i'm sure they're real worried about the "morality" of video taping of their torture. put that f'er in a poop cage, shove tubes down his nose and see how he likes it!

[Straight Shooter]

6. I couldn't do it. I would be in tears to witness those atrocities.

I applaud this woman for seeing beyond her own emotions and staying true to the long-range goal of ending animal suffering whenever and wherever she can.

Like many others, I consider PETA at times to be over the top in their methods, and often shrill in voicing their concerns. However, I would go ballistic if someone harmed my dog. PETA just takes it to the next level and expresses that protective instinct to encompass all animals.

[arikara]

7. This is why I support Peta

by sending money when I can afford it. I hate that these people are allowed to mistreat animals with no penalty.

[DoNotRefill]

8. As opposed to when PETA mistreats animals?

Read up on their euthanasia programs for cats...Cats eat songbirds, so they must be exterminated, even if they are already neutered.

thanks, but no thanks.

[livinginphotographs]

11. Links for that?

And Penn and Teller don't count as a reliable source.

Thanks in advance.

[DoNotRefill]

14. Please google it yourself....

since nothing I say will change your mind. PETA recommends euthanizing ferals because they eat songbirds. They do not support "spay and release". Apparently they figure that it's better to kill them than allow them to live feral, even when reproduction is taken out of the mix...and no, I didn't get this from Penn and Teller, it's on PETA's website.

[livinginphotographs]

18. Since you're so concerned with animals, cats especially,

I assume you're vegan, correct?

I figured you would just spout the Penn&Teller/CCF bullshit about some super secret giant freezer in PETA's HQ where they murder all the little kittie cats. But it's obvious that's not the case. You just see no difference between sticking a tube into a monkey's lung until it vomits blood, and humanely euthanizing a feral cat. (for the record, I disagree with PETA and their policy of euthanizing)

[Beaverhausen]

21. Euthanizing IS better than having them starve to death...

or be eaten by predators or hit by cars or...

I too applaud this woman. I don't know how she did it. :cry:

[DoNotRefill]

40. Human beings will all die pretty terrible deaths....

from things like cancer, et cetera. Would you support euthanizing all babies because it would be less painful to get one shot than to die of cancer? Because that's EXACTLY the argument you're putting forth for ferals...

Ever wonder why ferals have to be trapped? It's because they KNOW humans are looking to fuck them up. and YES, that includes the PETA butchers.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

48. No, because not all cats are doomed to die a painful death.

Many cats have loving homes and will live long lives. But being a feral is a death sentence. If you want to use babies, it would be like condemning parents for pulling the plug on their terminally ill baby. THAT is the argument.

[DoNotRefill]

57. EVERY living being dies.

selecting some to exterminate because YOU don't feel their life is worth living has indeed been done before. In case you didn't realize this, being born, in and of itself, is a death sentence, since "nobody gets out of here alive".

Your position is one worthy of Oliver Wendell Holmes in Buck v. Bell 274 U.S. 200(1927). Congratulations.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

60. Being a feral is a death sentence. That is a fact.

Compare the lifespan of a feral (2 years) with an indoor cat (15 years). I doesn't take much to draw the connection that ferals aren't dying of old age. They're dying of poisonings, shootings, disease and manglings. It is a DEATH sentence.

Not all cats are feral, therefore not all cats are doomed to this death sentence. Not all humans are born with terminal illnesses. But those that ARE given a death sentence face two choices. A slow torturous death, or a painless death.

And your comparison is absolutely absurd. By that position, who is anyone to decide that the joy of parenthood should be denied to animals? Your position is absolutely ridiculous.

[DoNotRefill]

72. so housecats don't die? they don't get feline leukemia?

they don't get hit by cars?

PETA kills animals. That's all there is to it.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

74. You're right, there's no difference between dying at 2 and dying at 15.

Or in a human analogy, getting torn apart at 24 and dying peacefully in bed at 80. Absolutely the same thing.

[DoNotRefill]

81. and what you're advocating is killing everybody at 15....

so that they don't get a chance to be torn apart at 24 or die in bed at 80.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

86. Your argument doesn't make sense.

Once again:

Feral cats live an average of 2 years. When they are caught, they are say, on average 1. Within the next 2 years, most of them will die at the hands of dogs, man, poison, hunger or disease. This isn't about whether they "get the chance" to live or not. If they have been denied a home at every optional place, they are doomed.


So your "logic" is wrong. It is not as though you were killing a healthy person at 15. It is as though a person at that young age faced certain death, a painful death, and chose euthanasia instead. Dogs and cats cannot make those decisions on their own. Who are we to make that decision for them? Well who are we do deny them a death with dignity instead of dying mangled on the street somewhere.

[phasev]

99. Euthanasia is an ethical approach to the feral cat problem

Do you have a viable and reasonable solution to the feral cat problem?

[phasev]

98. Absolutist claptrap n/t

[phasev]

97. why don't you adopt a feral cat?

Put up or shut up.

[phasev]

96. Do you know what feral cats are?

Feral cats are the same species as domesticated cats except they are born in the wild. The problem stemmed from the thousands of years of domesticating animals and then neglecting them and setting them off in the wild with virtually little to no survival instincts passed to them. PETA is doing the right thing by destroying them so that the problem and suffering can be minimized.

[livinginphotographs]

22. Like this?

http://www.askcarla.com/answers.asp?QuestionandanswerID=241

"Nevertheless, PETA’s position has never been that all feral cats should be euthanized. We believe that trap, vaccinate, spay/neuter, and release programs are acceptable when the cats are isolated from roads, people, and other animals who could harm them; regularly attended to by people who not only feed them but care for their medical needs; and situated in an area where they do not have access to wildlife and where the weather is temperate."

So sometimes they will euthanize cats that are unadoptable, and will do nothing but languish on the streets (you can thank a person somewhere in there for that, whether through abandonment or failing to spay or neuter their cat).

Do you have any other links for me, or do you want to continue making baseless attacks?

[DoNotRefill]

43. read what you just cut-and-pasted....

You cut and pasted the following:

"are acceptable when the cats are isolated from roads, people, and other animals who could harm them; regularly attended to by people who not only feed them but care for their medical needs; and situated in an area where they do not have access to wildlife and where the weather is temperate."

Please feel free to inform us of ANY PLACE that fits such criteria. If there are no roads, how will people get there to feed them? If there are no people, isn't there going to be wildlife? Wildlife is virtually EVERYWHERE. So where exactly does that leave as a viable PETA-approved relocation area? It leaves exactly NOWHERE....because in order to meet some of the criteria, you have to violate other parts of the criteria.

[livinginphotographs]

47. Read post #34.

Sums it up nicely. Or try reading a few of the other people who've responded to you regarding this. I've wasted enough time trying to actually provide links to back-up my assertions, while you still want to do nothing but pull unsubstantiated garbarge out of your ass.

I already said I disagreed with PETA's euthanizing feral cats. That doesn't mean I discount all the other good things they do, or deliberately mischaracterize their intentions, or try to equate torturing monkeys with humanely euthanizing a cat. I think your agenda becomes pretty clear with how you've managed to hijack this thread with a completely unrelated topic to someone working to help laboratory animals.

I'm still wondering if you're vegan, since you're obviously so concerned with PETA's horrible mistreatment of cats, and seek to rid the world of them so that all animals may live in peace. :eyes:

[SemiCharmedQuark]

24. Directly from PETA, here is the truth.

PETA does not support spay and release because of the potential danger that feral cats face. They do NOT support euthanizing ferals. They do support spay and release in areas that are far from ROADS where ferals could be run over. Not one thing is said about songbirds.

http://www.askcarla.com/answers.asp?QuestionandanswerID=241

[DoNotRefill]

28. They don't??? REALLY???? Here it is from their own mouths....

http://www.peta.org/mc/factsheet_display.asp?ID=38

"Feral cats themselves are also a threat to wildlife. The American Bird Conservancy estimates that free-roaming cats kill millions of birds and small mammals in the U.S. every year, including endangered species, such as the least tern and the piping plover."

That's from PETA's site. Claiming that PETA doesn't support euthanizing ferals because they eat songbirds is a LIE.

"Because of the huge number of feral cats and the severe shortage of good homes, the difficulty of socialization, and the dangers lurking where most feral cats live, it may be necessary and the most compassionate choice to euthanize feral cats. You can ask your veterinarian to do this or, if your local shelter uses an injection of sodium pentobarbital, take the cats there. Please do not allow the prospect of euthanasia to deter you from trapping cats. If you leave them where they are, they will almost certainly die a painful death. A painless injection is far kinder than any fate that feral cats will meet if left to survive on their own."

Claiming that PETA does not ENCOURAGE euthanasia of ferals is ANOTHER LIE.

http://www.peta.org/mc/factsheet_display.asp?ID=120

Here are the conditions that PETA supports spay and release for ferals:

"If you’ve determined that you have the time and resources to manage a feral cat colony, and the cats are in a safe place, i.e., they are isolated from roads, people, and other animals and located in an area where they do not have access to wildlife and where the weather is temperate, please be sure to follow the following minimum guidelines."

So, it must be a place where there are no people, no roads, and no other animals or wildlife. How does the moon sound? In other words, they only support not executing all ferals if the ferals are in a situation that is IMPOSSIBLE to achieve....translated, that means NEVER.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

29. No, saying "euthanasia may be necessary" isn't encouragment

Encouraging euthanasia means that they would put forward the idea enthusiastically for all ferals which is what I and other posters were responding to. You have suggested in your posts that PETA would rather kill all ferals than spay and release. This is not the case. They say it may be the kindest option, and indeed it is sometimes. Of course they would put forth euthanasia in some cases as the most humane option. Would you prefer they allow an animal to die a slow painful death from cancer than a painless death through euthanasia? That appears to be your stance.

And the songbirds are NOT the reason mentioned for the prospect of euthanasia, but rather just one of a hundred reasons why people should not let their cats roam free. By your own link, the largest reason for euthanizing is to prevent a violent death for the cat. Spaying or neutering does not help the feral live an easier life, it only prevents the next generation. Using capitals doesn't make your "argument" any stronger.

Peta assumes that those reading their pages can make good judgements. Since you appear to have difficulty with that task, let me help you. Access to wildlife means don't dump your feral by ponds or nesting grounds. There is wild life everywhere but the object of PETA and indeed all animal rights activists is to engage in behavior that causes the least amount of harm to animals. It is impossible to go through life without causing ANY harm.


On Edit: Your second link provides an outline for operating a feral cat colony. I thought you said PETA would not have feral colonies?

[DoNotRefill]

37. ROTFLMAO!!!!!

"By your own link, the largest reason for euthanizing is to prevent a violent death for the cat."

Yessir, just imagine, if we killed all babies, the Bush war machine wouldn't have anybody to run it!!!

That's the same kind of logic that PETA is using. They are saying "life as a feral sucks, so kill all ferals." Somehow, I doubt that the ferals want any part of that....which is why they have to trap them. BTW, did you notice the "wash the blanket in the trap" bit? Why do they recommend that? Prolly because ferals can smell the nastiness left by the last "lucky fellow".

PETA encourages euthanizing ferals in ALL circumstances unless they can be placed in a situation where there are no people, no roads, and no wildlife around. Where, exactly, would that be?

Who made PETA God to decide to exterminate entire colonies of animals "so that they don't suffer"? That's the same exact rationalization used at Wannsee.

"Your second link provides an outline for operating a feral cat colony. I thought you said PETA would not have feral colonies?"

Read the fine print....you know, the part about them not being near people, near roads, or near wildlife...It's like saying you can't have an adult bookstore within 50 miles of a school...that means you can't have adult bookstores, period.

"And the songbirds are NOT the reason mentioned for the prospect of euthanasia, but rather just one of a hundred reasons why people should not let their cats roam free."

So that article was really about not letting your pets roam free? Where did it even MENTION not allowing your pets to roam free? The ONLY mention in either article about pets was a "multi-generations-ago-ferals-were-once-housepets" bit. PETA wants to kill ferals because they EAT songbirds when left up to their own devices.

"Encouraging euthanasia means that they would put forward the idea enthusiastically for all ferals"

Do they or do they not say "Please do not allow the prospect of euthanasia to deter you from trapping cats. If you leave them where they are, they will almost certainly die a painful death. A painless injection is far kinder than any fate that feral cats will meet if left to survive on their own." That sure as hell sounds like they are ENCOURAGING people to trap ferals (with no chance of placing them) and then summarily execute them.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

44. Again, I'll be patient with you.

"Yessir, just imagine, if we killed all babies, the Bush war machine wouldn't have anybody to run it!!!"

You assume that life for a feral cat is good. It isn't. Male ferals usually only live 2 years. They aren't dying of old age. A more accurate analogy would be comparing euthanizing ferals to allowing AIDS and cancer patients to participate in assisted euthanasia.



"PETA encourages euthanizing ferals in ALL circumstances unless they can be placed in a situation where there are no people, no roads, and no wildlife around. Where, exactly, would that be?"

No, Peta assumes that its readers can make rational decisions based on the PETA concept of "do the least amount of damage". Of course they don't mean NO wildlife since there is wildlife everywhere. I already answered you on this point. They mean please do not put a feral colony on breeding grounds or other places where wild species breed or congregate in large numbers.

The article assumes that anyone reading is intelligent enough to know not to let their cat out. But in case anyone didn't know, it is just another reason why encouraging ferals is not a good idea. This is just basic reading comprehension. But let's go through it together:


Here are the two paragraphs:

"Andrew Rowan, former director of Tufts University’s Center for Animals and Public Policy, estimates that between 30 and 40 million homeless cats live in the United States.(1) Many of these cats are feral or “wild” cats, the descendants of unaltered tame cats who were abandoned and gave birth to kittens who never had contact with humans. Although ferals are fearful of humans, they are still domesticated and ill-equipped to survive on their own. Feral cats do not die of “old age.” They are poisoned, shot, tortured by cruel people, attacked by other animals, or hit by cars, or they die of exposure, starvation, or highly contagious fatal diseases, such as rabies, feline AIDS, feline leukemia, and feline infectious peritonitis. In one feral cat colony, half of the 32 cats were shot by a man who claimed that they were “attacking” his children.(2) Cats in another colony were shot with darts.(3) A loose dog killed several cats in another colony.(4)
Even easily treatable conditions can be deadly for cats who cannot be handled and regularly taken to a veterinarian. Minor cuts or puncture wounds can turn into raging infections and abscesses. Untreated upper respiratory infections lead to eyes and noses so caked with mucus that animals can barely see or breathe. Ferals often scratch their ears bloody, driven crazy by the pain and itching of ear mites and accompanying infections. Others die of blood loss or anemia from worms and fleas. Urinary tract infections, which frequently lead to blockage in male cats, cause extremely painful, lingering deaths if not treated.

Feral cats themselves are also a threat to wildlife. The American Bird Conservancy estimates that free-roaming cats kill millions of birds and small mammals in the U.S. every year, including endangered species, such as the least tern and the piping plover."


Now, what is the main point of those two paragraphs? Far and away, the point is that feral cats live a dangerous life. The songbird issue is a secondary matter.

Now, coming from that same link, you will notice that in the "how to" section of trapping, it says that first you should make arrangements for a home for the cat. If not a home, then a shelter. If you can't find either, take the cat home, but don't let it out in the house. It suggests that after surgery (spaying) to give the cat time and space until it becomes accustomed to living indoors.

AFTER these options have been exhausted, it suggests that perhaps the most compassionate thing is to euthanize. That is, after you have attempted to place the cat with friends, family, other animal lovers, cat enthusiasts, veterinarians, shelters or your own home, if you can't find a home, it MAY be the best option to euthanize the cat. Wow, they really are jumping the gun for the death sentence there, aren't they? What would be the alternative option? You can't place the cat anywhere. The ONLY other option is to put the cat out again. Knowing that most cats die violent deaths outdoors, you honestly think that those that wish to euthanize are the monsters?

[DoNotRefill]

54. a few points:

First off, would you care to wager what percentage of animals turned over to PETA end up being euthanized?

You just don't seem to get it. For example, you say: "A more accurate analogy would be comparing euthanizing ferals to allowing AIDS and cancer patients to participate in assisted euthanasia."

Where's the "voluntary" part in PETA's suggestion? What PETA is doing, to correct your analogy, is randomly rounding up people and forcibly euthanizing them to try and prevent the spread of cancer and AIDS.

"No, Peta assumes that its readers can make rational decisions based on the PETA concept of "do the least amount of damage"."

Where does PETA spell that out? Is it in the old part about throwing paint on little old ladies? Or is it in the part of deliberately trying to traumatize the young children of fur-wearers with "comic books" similar to the anti-abortion pictures of "aborted fetuses"? PETA is now a PR organization. Their "care for animals" wing is one of traps and extermination. And they, BY FAR, do more damage to the animal rights movement than they do good.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

67. By your logic, animals don't CHOOSE to get spayed or neutered either.

So isn't spaying and neutering just like rounding up people who you don't think should breed?

:eyes:

[DoNotRefill]

69. given a choice between neutering them and murdering them....

I'm pretty sure that neutering is the LESS intrusive method...

[SemiCharmedQuark]

76. So now YOU are deciding what others' life choices should be?

Some would argue a life of solitiude is not worth living. Who are you to decide that?


Either way, we are stewards of the earth, and we have to make the choices for those that can't as best we can.

[bitchkitty]

93. I would say don't waste your time

with this one, but I am enjoying your posts!

[pie]

85. You just LOOOOVE to twist the facts

READ the site.
CALL PETA.
STOP making up lies!!!!!

[The Stranger]

34. I suppose it is inevitable, but by having to post the quotations from

PETA's website -- all of which are well-considered in earnestly seeking ethical solutions where any solution is extremely difficult -- you highlight the inanity of your ranting rather than cause any discredit to PETA.

But thanks nevertheless.

[DoNotRefill]

55. So trapping and euthanizing animals is now ethical???

for an animal rights group???

[The Stranger]

92. When the only other option is starvation or similar death.

The black and white absolutist thinking revealed in your posts makes for poor rhetoric, and even poorer Progressivism.

[pie]

25. I Googled. Looks like these are all right wing and/or NRA sites!

You don't actually trust these sources... do you?

[DoNotRefill]

39. if you do "advanced search" in the peta.org domain....

you can EASILY find their position on ferals. Hell, I've linked to several of them in this thread. And YES, I trust PETA.org to tell us what PETA's positions on things are. If you can't trust their official webpage, what source COULD you trust?

[pie]

80. What the hell are you babbling about?

[pie]

84. You know that is all BS

You have an agenda of some sort.
How about looking at the truth?

[classics]

9. Aww the monkeys were denied health care?

When human beings get some I'll feel sorry for the monkeys.

[livinginphotographs]

13. So you're cool with needless cruelty to animals?

Just curious.

[canadianbeaver]

16. maybe talk to your reps....then spout off......I have health care...

and I don't like your comments....the country you live in is going down the toilet...along with all your rights...as well as any rights animals may have had at one point...

Don't get me wrong....Canada does some atrocious acts also...seal hunt for one...and I know there are many more....All acts of cruelty against any living being is WRONG...PERIOD!!!

[JackieO]

26. Not only were they denied health care...

...but they were thrown around, beaten and generally treated like shit. Are you really OK with that?

Check out http://covancecruelty.com for details.

[0rganism]

32. "denied health care" misses the point completely

The monkeys in question were captured (or bred in captivity) and tortured by no choice of their own. They didn't sign any W2s, they didn't agree to work for substandard wages, they didn't vote down a union. Bottom line: Vivisection isn't a wal-mart job for monkeys.

[livinginphotographs]

12. She's a much stronger person than me.

I could never tolerate the strain of what it's probably like to watch that everyday and not be able to do anything to stop it.

Working at PETA is definitely not sitting around in a drum circle singing folk songs. It takes a very strong person to do what many of them have to do and see everyday, a much stronger person than I am, and that's why I'm thankful that they exist.

[DoNotRefill]

15. You're right, working for PETA involves killing animals.

I wonder why PETA's shelter isn't "no kill"...Oh, yeah, if it was "no kill", it would cost Ingrid money that she could put in her pocket instead...

[livinginphotographs]

19. Funny. I've known several people that worked for PETA.

And none have killed animals. How many animals have you killed? Just asking, you know, to make sure you're consistent and don't just have an agenda against anyone concerned with animal welfare.

[DoNotRefill]

42. One....it was a deer....

and I hit it with a car.

Talk to your friends, and ask them about the feral colony in Ghent that had been "handled" by another group...spayed and released, given their shots, et cetera, and then PETA went in, trapped them, and killed them all.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

46. Do you have any links or anything to that story?

Any sort of corroboration? Any details other than "another group" and Ghent. Date? Anything?

[livinginphotographs]

49. Hey, I can play the heresay game also.

None of the people I know would've had anything to do with that. Despite the fact that PETA does take ferals to vets to be euthanized when they are completely unadoptable, there's no kitty kat Auschwitz going on in PETA headquarters, despite what Penn and Teller tell you.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

50. I hear PETA steals children in the night

Two magicians told me so!

[DoNotRefill]

61. So you admit they do trap and kill cats....

and you say that there is no kitty auschwitz in the PETA HQ, since they take them to a vet's office to have them executed. So what, exactly, are we arguing about? You've admitted all of the salient points in my argument....they trap ferals, they execute them, but it's not in their HQ, it's at the local vet's offices.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

62. You haven't provided a link to your magical story yet.

[DoNotRefill]

65. Our group had adopted them....

we'd trapped them, spayed them, gotten them their shots, et cetera. PETA then came in and killed them. Why? Because ferals eat birds.

[livinginphotographs]

89. I admit that PETA has a policy of euthanizing ferals that

are either unadoptable, too sick, or where releasing them would be even more cruel than humanely euthanizing. No one is arguing that with you. What they are arguing about how is how disingenuous you're being by saying PETA is a bunch of hypocrites because they are on a mission to exterminate every feral cat in the world. Either you're being intentionally obtuse, or you're just not bothering to read the posts that reply to you.

I ask you again: are you vegan? Since you show such indignation at the occasional cat being humanely euthanized by a group that truly does have their best interests in mind, I assume you're equally horrified by humans using animals as nothing more than snack machines (usually in incredibly cruel ways).

[SemiCharmedQuark]

20. No, if it were no kill, the numbers would overwhelm the resources.

And the reason PETA does not condone spay and release is because a.) it is often illegal and b.) allowing a cat to go loose is endangering that cat. Cats have been domesticated for 5000 years. They no longer are capable of effectively surviving in the wild. Leaving a cat outside is leaving it open to a death by poison, dogs, vehicles, other cats, or just mean nasty people who have nothing better to do than shoot cats. Humans fight for the right to die with dignity. Why should that right be denied animals? Why should they be turned out where they almost always face a violent end?


The number of irresponsible people is overwhelming. Shelters simply can't keep all the animals. Sometimes the animals have diseases or conditions that would cost thousands of dollars to take care of. Which is better, to save that one animal or to provide for the care of 10 others? Other times there are simply too many animals. Good intentions don't feed or clean. Think about how many times a hoarder has been arrested. They probably had good intentions of saving animals. But they took on more than they could handle and instead of having 10 animals in good conditions, they had 30 in horrible conditions. The same applies for any place at any time. If PETA only has facilities for 200 animals, they cannot take in every animal. It would cut the value of life of the 200 that were there first. Of course, if PETA could raise more funds, they could care for more animals. But that is difficult to do when lies like this are spread about them by people like you.

[pie]

23. Thank You for the excellent post

I agree 100% with everything you said.

[arikara]

30. Good post

we live in an area where people drop off their pet cats when they don't want them any more, and which we wind up feeding and deworming etc. However there was one big nasty fellow who spent the better part of his time attacking ours and the neighbor's cats. When ours got sick from an infected bite I got fed up and live trapped it and had the animal control people come pick it up. It was a beautiful animal but feral and mean. The sad thing is that this had probably been someone's pet and they cruelly dropped it off to fend for itself instead of finding it a home or taking it to the SPCA. It isn't the animal's fault and it was very upsetting to have to trap the animal but I couldn't see any way around it as it was terrorizing the neighborhood.

[Mairead]

31. "Cats have been domesticated for 5000 years."

Good post.

I'd just like to point out that they recently opened a 9400-y.o. joint human-feline grave on Cyprus. The burial was consistent with the cat (adolescent kitten, really), an archetypal <i>lybica</i> tabby, having been a companion of the deceased human.

http://www.vetscite.org/publish/items/001766/

[jayctravis]

38. Feral cats exist.

I understand what you mean though. They have adapted to the same environment humans have.

There was a stray cat we welcomed into our house, and discovering her pregnant, kept her in. She'd had at least two litters outside. We let her deliver the kittens, then had her and all of the kittens fixed at the proper age. Several months later, the mother cat decided to move back out into the wild, and we have several beautiful cats which live 90 percent inside our house.

Strays can be a problem. My cousin got her face gored open at age six by a stray cat which wasn't vicious but didn't trust humans. She had to go through a long process of rabies shots.

[frictionlessO]

35. Damn friggin' straight!!!

I get sooo very tired of people who have no idea about this kind of activism and what it really takes.

"Uh oh heres a group that about half of America hates, lets not support them and while were at it lets see if I can get people up in arms enough in a thread by what I post that I can get them to contradict themseleves over and for the love of their cause."

Thats what has transpired here time and again, almost just like the old agitprop days!! Only with these here internets.

[DoNotRefill]

41. Ah. So it will overwhelm their resources? Really?

there are lots of no-kill shelters out there that run on a tiny fraction of PETA's annual budget, and they don't have to resort to killing animals. Why is that?

Could it be because PETA's budget is instead spent on things like grandstanding (oh, yeah, and buying that office building....which is built on a friggin WETLAND) instead of actually helping animals?

[SemiCharmedQuark]

45. I've worked for no kill shelters--they operate by setting limits on #s

We either a.) wouldn't take any more animals than the absolute limit or b.) would take more but the quality of life for the other cats would go down. Simple. It's no kill. The end result is, it is difficult to get those shelters to take animals. If they have an old cat, sure, that old cat will probably just sit there in a cage until it dies naturally. In that time, 10 cats could have been rescued and adopted out again.

It's not a difficult concept. I don't know why you are having trouble comprehending it. No kill shelters work hard to keep the "no kill" title. It means they turn away people who come to leave their pets. Those people just go to a regular shelter, having run out of options. Their cat ends up in a regular shelter anyway.

[Catchawave]

52. Where do you get your information?

Sounds like those icky anti-animal propaganda websites ? Care to share links with us. You obviously have no idea what PETA does?

http://www.peta25.org/

P.S. You'll see how they "help the animals". Enjoy!

[DoNotRefill]

63. actually....

it stems from being down there when they whacked our adopted colony.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

64. Right. Something tells me you're not telling the whole story.

Of course, you have no links for your story, or proof of any kind so we'll never know.

[DoNotRefill]

66. Heh...

that comes from not wanting our houses to be firebombed...

[SemiCharmedQuark]

68. Yeah. Right.

:eyes:

"Heh...that comes from not wanting our houses to be firebombed..."



There goes the last shred of credibility you had.

[DoNotRefill]

70. Two words for you: they are "Rodney" and "Coronado".

eom

[SemiCharmedQuark]

75. Yes, one guy sure does define an organization....Zell Miller!

One guy, 100 guys...PETA is a huge organization. There have been extremist liberals who have done awful things as well.

[Catchawave]

71. Who whacked your adopted colony?

The one at the shipyard? I'm "down there" too. Just wondering if you have some of your facts wrong :shrug:

[DoNotRefill]

73. Nope, it was in Ghent...

eom

[Catchawave]

78. Peta stormed Ghent and whacked your colony?

:crazy:

[Catchawave]

77. Found the info.....!

http://www.catsplay.com/thedailycat/2002-06-17/news/2002-06-16.html


News Briefs for the Week of June 16, 2002

By Marcella Durand for The Daily Cat

Navy Plans to Evict All Stray Cats

In a disappointing jump backwards, the United States Navy has decided to ban trap-neuter-return programs on its bases. In trap-neuter-return programs, or TNR, feral cats are trapped, neutered and released back into the same area. The presence of the neutered cats prevent new cats from colonizing the area, while the feline population shrinks naturally. Last year, the Navy made some major steps forward in humanely controlling its feral cat population when the Norfolk Naval Shipyard in Portsmouth, Virginia, agreed to adopt TNR.

But on January 10, 2002, Admiral Vern Clerk, Chief of Naval Operations, approved a new "Policy Letter Preventing Feral Cat and Dog Populations on Navy Property," which prohibits feeding feral animals and/or implementing TNR on Navy property. The new policy also requires the "humane capture and removal of free-roaming cats and dogs...no later than 1 January 2003." Since feral cats are considered by many animal shelters to be unadoptable, many of these cats will certainly face death. And, because the feral cats are removed but the source of their food (usually garbage) is not, other feral cats almost always move in and recolonize the area.

"We're all devastated," says Cynthia Moose, a marine machinist at the Norfolk Naval Shipyard and a primary caretaker of the feral cat colony there. "None of us understand why all of a sudden this has come about."

In a letter to Admiral Clerk, Ed Boks, executive director of Maricopa County Animal Care & Control in Arizona, wrote, "As director of the largest animal control program in the United States, handling over 10,000 feral cats annually in a county larger than 17 states, I can tell you first hand, that after 30 years of the catch-and-kill methodology your new policy advocates, our feral cat problems only grew worse and worse each year. There are very real biological reasons for this reality. I can personally assure you that your new policy will only exacerbate your feral cat problems."

You can send polite letters expressing your opinion to:

Admiral Vern Clark
Chief of Naval Operations
2000 Navy Pentagon
Washington, D.C. 20350-2000
******
No mention of PETA doing the dirty....as I recall this event warranted the involvement of all of the Tidewater area's shelters/rescues. You may want to take your fight to the Navy!

[DoNotRefill]

82. As I'm sure you know....

the Shipyard ain't Ghent.....

[Catchawave]

87. Your original statement wasn't specific to area....

Feral colonies don't belong in an urban area like Ghent. Sorry for your loss, but I know for a fact 'peta' didn't whack them.

[leftchick]

17. I agree with you

I could not do it but than God for these brave folks that are able to and bring us the truth!

[The Stranger]

27. Kick it.

GO PETA!!!!!!

[NeoConsSuck]

51. Double Kick..

If the Democratic party had the courage that PETA has, our country wouldn't be subservient to pack a criminal neocons.

[JackieO]

33. Demo at Covance on Thursday

Great article, thanks for posting!

WHAT: PETA Demo in front of Covance’s offices
WHERE: Public property in front of 210 Carnegie Ctr, Princeton, NJ
WHAT: This Thursday, June 2, from 12 noon to 1 p.m

For 11 months from April 2004 to March 2005, PETA's investigator worked as a primate technician inside Covance’s animal testing lab in Vienna, Virginia. Our investigator documented hideous abuse of monkeys who were struck, choked, thrown against cages, threatened, and psychologically tormented. Covance often uses wild-caught one-and-two-year-old monkeys, who are traumatized from having been ripped from their mothers.

Thick dosing tubes too large for these small monkeys were pushed up their nostrils, ripping their sinus cavities and resulting in daily nose bleeds. Monkeys were bound crudely with ropes into restraint chairs or forced into hard plastic tubes where they would be dosed and bled. Some monkeys, in a desperate attempt to help other monkeys, would reach their tiny arms out of their cages and grab the sleeves of workers to try to stop them from hurting their friends. Sick and injured animals were denied veterinary care and many animals endured intense suffering before dying alone in their cages. Click here to learn more.

You can help these monkeys! We’ll be doing a demonstration in front of Covance’s offices at 210 Carnegie Ctr. this Thursday, June 2, from 12 noon to 1 p.m. We need as many people as possible to hold signs and hand out leaflets, we will also be showing actual undercover footage from their Vienna, VA lab on a body screen TV.

Please let me know ASAP if you will be able to attend this important demonstration. You can call me at 757-962-8267 or email [e-mail].

For the monkeys,

Christy Griffin
Campaign Coordinator
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals
757-962-8267

CovanceCruelty.com

[Ignis]

36. Synergy: Deep Throat for animals?

This woman is a hero.

[shockra]

56. AOL Poll about this article.

Also a pic of Lisa with a monkey.

http://aolsvc.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20050530175709990002&ncid=NWS00010000000001

Do you think her work serves a useful purpose?

Yes 64%
No 30%
I'm not sure 6%
Total Votes: 75,962

[Catchawave]

79. WOW...it's been in the 60's all day.....

Good for the AOL members!

[Rex]

58. Our gummit does the same things to humans in various parts of the world

why would their corporate masters be any different?

[obxhead]

83. watched the video

how horrible.
and thanks to the ones that kept this on subject.
maybe we should round up squirrels too. They get squished by cars all the time.
yeah or maybe we should let all species WE introduced destroy entire populations of other species that were already here.
There is two sides to the dumb cat thing, (3 well loved cats in my family) and both have strong points.
This was about the monkeys remember.
Props to PETA and Lisa Leitten

[lonestarnot]

88. OMG This is terrible treatment! Can we send bushitler to camp here?

[flvegan]

90. THANK YOU PETA!!!

Another great story about another great activist working for the best damn animal advocacy group in the world. Love 'em or hate 'em, they're effective and efficient.

My hat certainly goes off to Ms. Leitten for what she did, for I could not do the same.

Happy 25th anniversary, PETA. May the next 25 be even more successful for you and for the animals.

[SOS]

94. Is this thread about Lisa Leitten?

:shrug:

[Catchawave]

95. Yes, until PETA got slammed :) n/t