PETA asks town of Fishkill, NY to change name [Archive]

Crazed Rabbit

07-17-2005, 00:53

PETA has even offered Fishkill an incentive to eradicate its history: if the town changes its title, the group will give $15,000 worth of soy-based fish products to local schools.

Somehow, I doubt the kids would appreciate that. Besides, what the heck is a soy based fish product? It sounds like it's not even fish.

"When they think of Fishkill, they think of abusing fish and that's not the right message," a spokeswoman for the group's fish empathy project said of those who might see the name on a map.

I know the first thing I thought was about putting little bluegills on the rack until they told me where the good trout fishing spots were, not to mention poking bass with needles just for fun.

Is there no limit to how stupid people can become and still have enough brain power to run their bodily functions?

Apperently not.

Crazed Rabbit

scooter_the_shooter

07-17-2005, 00:57

:furious3: I hate peta they want to take away my meat and my huntin'. If you want to be phycotic veggie eater thats your problem but don't try and enforce that on me

Alexander the Pretty Good

07-17-2005, 00:58

Originally posted by some PETA wacko
When they think of Fishkill, they think of abusing fish and that's not the right message.

Man, I was just fine until I read that article. I saw the word "Fishkill" and just flipped out! I went out and
http://www.catchmorefish.com/gallery/12.jpg
caught some fish, a deadly sin in itself. Then I shot them in a
http://lennthompson.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/barrel.jpg
barrel. Then I
http://bwrc.eecs.berkeley.edu/People/Grad_Students/huifangq/food/HuifangCookings/edited/fried_fish.jpg
cooked them up good - fried them, in fact.

Fishkill must change now, to stop the genocide of fish everywhere! :help:

~;p

whyidie

07-17-2005, 00:59

They should oblige them and change the name to Petakill.

Crazed Rabbit

07-17-2005, 01:03

I wonder what Peta means in Dutch. If it meant idiot or something like that, the irony would be hilarious. And then they could get $15,000 worth of fake fish made out of soy!

Crazed Rabbit

scooter_the_shooter

07-17-2005, 01:10

to prove how crazy peta is read the website http://www.peta.org

And here is a clipping from that site :furious3:

“How can you justify the millions of dollars of property damage caused by the Animal Liberation Front (ALF)?”

Throughout history, some people have felt the need to break the law to fight injustice. The Underground Railroad and the French Resistance are examples of movements in which people broke the law in order to answer to a higher morality. The ALF, which is simply the name adopted by people who act illegally in behalf of animal rights, breaks inanimate objects such as stereotaxic devices and decapitators in order to save lives. ALF members burn empty buildings in which animals are tortured and killed. ALF “raids” have given us proof of horrific cruelty that would not have otherwise been discovered or believed and have resulted in criminal charges’ being filed against laboratories for violations of the Animal Welfare Act. Often, ALF raids have been followed by widespread scientific condemnation of the practices occurring in the targeted labs, and some abusive laboratories have been permanently shut down as a result.

Steppe Merc

07-17-2005, 02:12

PETA can help some really abused animals. But sometimes they are idiots, like in this. No animal is getting hurt, it's a frikkin town name!

Byzantine Prince

07-17-2005, 02:16

How dare you Steppe Merc!?!? Fish are actually getting their feelings hurt because of that name. And no don't tel me to calm down!!! :furious3:

King of Atlantis

07-17-2005, 03:04

Fishkill should get an award for such a fine name ~:)

Crazed Rabbit

07-17-2005, 03:52

Just FYI, PETA kills-er, 'ethically euthanizes', 85% of the animals they take in.

Oh, and somehow freeing slaves and wanton property distruction are morally equivalent (they don't mention how ALF likes to burn down people's homes, or parts of universities).

Crazed Rabbit

Gregoshi

07-17-2005, 04:19

Suggested name change for the town of Fishkill, NY: "bite me" in Dutch.

Lemur

07-17-2005, 04:29

Thank God PETA didn't know about Fishkill's earlier name, Bunnyslaughter.

Devastatin Dave

07-17-2005, 04:40

Thank God PETA didn't know about Fishkill's earlier name, Bunnyslaughter.

LOL, and before that it was Clubasealville. ~D

Mongoose

07-17-2005, 04:57

Fishkill....suddenly, i feel...an unstoppable urge...to kill fish....must kill fish now!!!...with an assault gun...Maybe i will just put some posion...in the water...

Must...not...kill...the...fish.... "Fishkill"... NOOOOOOOOOOOOO! *runs off to the nearest river, with an anti-tank missle*

Gregoshi

07-17-2005, 05:02

...runs off to the nearest river, with an anti-tank missle*

Silly mongoose. You don't use anti-tank missiles for fish in a river. No, you use those missiles when they're in a fish tank.

:hide:

Redleg

07-17-2005, 05:03

LOL, and before that it was Clubasealville. ~D

PETA makes for some good jokes - they often make themselves look foolish.

Mongoose

07-17-2005, 05:10

Silly mongoose. You don't use anti-tank missiles for fish in a river. No, you use those missiles when they're in a fish tank.

:hide:

Yeah, but it's so much cooler with an anti-tank missle....if the name was dontlikefish, then a hand gun would work. BUT Fishkill is just asking for something heavier....

Lemur

07-17-2005, 05:14

PETA makes for some good jokes - they often make themselves look foolish.
And what's sad is that the idea behind them -- the notion that one should treat animals ethically -- is a sound one. Why do they have to be such eco-nazis about it? The notion that if you're going to kill it you ought to eat it isn't radical. The idea that one shouldn't pointlessly torture animals isn't far-out. But then they have to go ruining it by pursing a radical vegan anti-homo-sapiens agenda. Sigh.

Why do people engaged in what ought to be a reasonable cause have to behave like fruit loops? Why do extremists have to suck all the fun out of sensible issues?

Well, not all the fun. Like you said, they're plenty amusing to poke fun at.

sharrukin

07-17-2005, 05:35

PETA wouldn't understand

Instructions on how to clean your toilet

1. Put both lids of the toilet up and add 1/8 cup of pet shampoo
to the water in the bowl.

2. Pick up the cat and soothe him while you carry him towards
the bathroom.

3. In one smooth movement, put the cat in the toilet and close
both lids. You may need to stand on the lid.

4. The cat will self agitate and make ample suds. Never mind the
noises that come from the toilet, the cat is actually enjoying this.

5. Flush the toilet three or four times. This provides a “power-wash”
and “rinse.”

6. Have someone open the front door of your home. Be sure that
there are no people between the bathroom and the front door.

7. Stand behind the toilet as far as you can, and quickly lift both lids.

8. The cat will rocket out of the toilet, streak through the bathroom,
and run outside where he will dry himself off.

9. Both the commode and the cat will be sparkling clean.

https://img305.imageshack.us/img305/1751/thecat9lw.th.jpg (https://img305.imageshack.us/my.php?image=thecat9lw.jpg)

Samurai Waki

07-17-2005, 05:52

PanzerJaeger

07-17-2005, 05:57

This made me laugh almost as much as when the French canned the Rainbow Warrior.

Its as if Greenpeace and PETA are competing for the "Most Idiotic Environuts" award. :dizzy2:

InsaneApache

07-17-2005, 08:21

I'm going to start an Organization called the "The Peoples Liberation of Leafy Greens, Fruit, and Vegetables Front", then we could take this protesting of inanimate, or unfeeling creatures on a whole new scale.

Actually I heard somewhere that grass screams when you cut it... ~:confused: ....must be the noise of the mower that covers it, 'cos I never heard it. ~D

Zalmoxis

07-17-2005, 11:14

First, I'm gonna stock up on salmon to last me a week, and I'll smoke it on my porch, with a big FU PETA sign written in sausages while I parade around the block wearing a brand new beaver coat. Then, I'll try to figure out why the people at PETA are such idiots when it comes to rational thought when I eat said salmon.

Samurai Waki

07-17-2005, 11:44

mmmm....smoked Sock-Eyed Salmon. I think I'll join you. I'll wearing my Baby Seal Fur Coat, Mink Hat, and Bottle-Nose Dolphin Skin Boots (wow. I dress like a pimp ~:pimp: )

Mount Suribachi

07-17-2005, 13:30

Lets not forget when some Palestinian terror group used a donkey "suicide bomber" killing a load of civilians, and PETA were outraged at the death of the donkey :furious3:

Kaiser of Arabia

07-17-2005, 13:43

I'm forming a new PETA, People for the Edible Treatment of Animals.

By the way, I just had deep fried sardines and grilled fish (I forget what type lol) the other day. It was good.

Oh, and they should change their name to Fishabusekill

Beirut

07-17-2005, 15:54

Pretty stupid to do this.

PETA does great work exposing labs who test (torture) monkeys and dogs, but their reputation certainly slides downhill with idiotic stunts like this.

Crazed Rabbit

07-17-2005, 17:47

Lets not forget when some Palestinian terror group used a donkey "suicide bomber" killing a load of civilians, and PETA were outraged at the death of the donkey

We see now their true nature.

Kaiser, I've seen a t-shirt that said PETA: People for the Eating of Tasty Animals. I'll have to start up a local chapter.

Crazed Rabbit

BDC

07-17-2005, 18:31

Everyone should show how sorry they are for the fish by posting all the uneaten fish heads to PETA for a humane (animane?) burial.

Papewaio

07-18-2005, 02:17

I think PETA are idiots and Greenpeace full of hyperbole.

This made me laugh almost as much as when the French canned the Rainbow Warrior.

I'm just wondering if you are referring to the French terrorist attack on the Rainbow Warrior as a funny incident, in which the French Government murdered a person in sinking the Rainbow Warrior?

PanzerJaeger

07-18-2005, 03:39

Yea, it was poetic justice in its funniest sense.

And the French didnt kill anyone. The hippy who died was safe and then went back to try and get his crap off the boat and couldnt swim. :fishbowl:

Papewaio

07-18-2005, 04:05

Yea, it was poetic justice in its funniest sense.

And the French didnt kill anyone. The hippy who died was safe and then went back to try and get his crap off the boat and couldnt swim. :fishbowl:

So you support terrorist attacks against civilians.

The people on board the Rainbow Warrior normally would have been asleep when the limpet mine went off. However due to a birthday party being held they where on the upper decks. The Portugese man who was murdered died because he went downstairs to get his camera equipment to get his camera after the first blast, when the second one went off destroying the deck he was on. If things had gone to plan the majority of people on board would have been murdered. Only luck saved lives, not the decision of the terrorists.

You are condoning the murder of civilians by governments going into other nations to censure free speech.

PanzerJaeger

07-18-2005, 04:55

So you support terrorist attacks against civilians.

Greenpeace are not civilians. If anything, they are terrorists themselves.

The people on board the Rainbow Warrior normally would have been asleep when the limpet mine went off. However due to a birthday party being held they where on the upper decks. The Portugese man who was murdered died because he went downstairs to get his camera equipment to get his camera after the first blast, when the second one went off destroying the deck he was on. If things had gone to plan the majority of people on board would have been murdered. Only luck saved lives, not the decision of the terrorists.

It is well documented that the french agents did not attempt to take any lives and its not really murder as the hippy didnt have the sense to get off the boat, but in fact went back in. :dizzy2:

You are condoning the murder of civilians by governments going into other nations to censure free speech.

I am condoning nothing. I am commenting on the irony that a group who was planning on sabotaging the french got sabotaged themselves.

Papewaio

07-18-2005, 05:11

A) You are condoning murder when you state:

Yea, it was poetic justice in its funniest sense.

And the French didnt kill anyone. The hippy who died was safe and then went back to try and get his crap off the boat and couldnt swim.

You think it was funny that he died because you disagree with his political stance.

B)
Greenpeace are not civilians. If anything, they are terrorists themselves.

You are using more hyperbole then Greenpeace does with respect to the environment. Stuff the facts, just make up sh!t as you go along. When has Greenpeace ever used weapons, killed military or civilians or blown things up?

C)
It is well documented that the french agents did not attempt to take any lives and its not really murder as the hippy didnt have the sense to get off the boat, but in fact went back in.

Documented by whom, do you have any of these facts? The Limpet mines where timed to go off during the normal sleeping times of those on board. This could have resulted in all on board being murdered.

D)
I am commenting on the irony that a group who was planning on sabotaging the french got sabotaged themselves.

They were going to protest against a highly arrogant government that was blowing up nuclear weapons in a coral atoll. A coral atoll is not a particularly stable place to store nuclear waste. It is a normal part of democracy to allow protests. It is a disgusting state of affairs to blow up a ship to sow terror to stop people voicing their disgust about this abuse.

Your stance is absolutely disgusting and offensive.

PanzerJaeger

07-18-2005, 05:30

You think it was funny that he died because you disagree with his political stance.

I think it is funny greenpeace got screwed with just like they do to people all over the world.

The man's death is not what is funny about the incident to me, but he was hardly an innocent civilian.

You are using more hyperbole then Greenpeace does with respect to the environment. Stuff the facts, just make up sh!t as you go along. When has Greenpeace ever used weapons, killed military or civilians or blown things up?

Greenpeace feels it has the right to traipse around the world and sabotage private industries and groups of people because it disagrees with them. They ignore the law, private property, and their own integrity to hurt honest working people in their crusades.

Just last month they broke into the Land Rover factory and handcuffed themselves to the cars. This loss of productivity cost the company thousands of pounds which will come out of the pockets of the workers and the business.

Innocent civilians? Hardly.. :laugh4:

Documented by whom, do you have any of these facts? The Limpet mines where timed to go off during the normal sleeping times of those on board. This could have resulted in all on board being murdered.

Via Wiki-

In 2005, Admiral Pierre Lacoste, head of DGSE at the time, admitted that the aim of the operation had not been to kill, and that the death weighed heavily on his conscience.

They were going to protest against a highly arrogant government that was blowing up nuclear weapons in a coral atoll. A coral atoll is not a particularly stable place to store nuclear waste. It is a normal part of democracy to allow protests. It is a disgusting state of affairs to blow up a ship to sow terror to stop people voicing their disgust about this abuse.

Via Wiki-

During previous nuclear tests at Mururoa, protest ships had been boarded by French commandos after sailing inside the shipping exclusion zone around the atoll. With the 1985 tests, Greenpeace had intended to monitor the impact of nuclear tests and place protesters on the island to do this. The French Government infiltrated the New Zealand organisation and discovered these plans.

Protestors do not have free reign of the world.

This is what greenpeace does. They incite violence towards themselves by trying to ruin things they dont agree with and then play the victim.

Your stance is absolutely disgusting and offensive.

My stance? Its not as if I support what happened or would allow it to happen again. I simply find it ironic that such a group had happen to them exactly what they do to others. I have no dog in the fight, im just an observer.

On the other hand, your stance is absolutely biased and ignorant of the actually reality of the situation.

Papewaio

07-18-2005, 05:41

I think it is funny greenpeace got screwed with just like they do to people all over the world.

The man's death is not what is funny about the incident to me, but he was hardly an innocent civilian.

Show me how he was a terrorist? Last time I looked a camera was not a weapon.

Greenpeace feels it has the right to traipse around the world and sabotage private industries and groups of people because it disagrees with them. They ignore the law, private property, and their own integrity to hurt honest working people in their crusades.

Just last month they broke into the Land Rover factory and handcuffed themselves to the cars. This loss of productivity cost the company thousands of pounds which will come out of the pockets of the workers and the business.

Innocent civilians? Hardly.. :laugh4:

Definitly civilians, they are not using weapons and they are clearly identifying themselves. You are equating them with terrorists which is hyperbole. In what way can you compare them with Hamas, AQ, JI or the IRA?

Greenpeace does not go around killing people. Nor do I see how you can justify murdering people because they have caused a loss of productivity.

Protestors do not have free reign of the world.

This is what greenpeace does. They incite violence towards themselves by trying to ruin things they dont agree with and then play the victim.

They did not escalte the violence, they use peaceful means of protest. You are not giving people much of an oppourtunity to protest if they are not even allowed to peacefully do so.

Do as we say or we will kill you is not a democratic stance.

My stance? Its not as if I support what happened or would allow it to happen again. I simply find it ironic that such a group had happen to them exactly what they do to others. I have no dog in the fight, im just an observer.

On the other hand, your stance is absolutely biased and ignorant of the actually reality of the situation.

As a Kiwi, I am against the idea that another nation can go to New Zealand and murder people who are using non violent forms of protest.

I do not see the irony, they do not go around and blow people up.

PanzerJaeger

07-18-2005, 06:07

Show me how he was a terrorist? Last time I looked a camera was not a weapon.

He associated himself with an organization that terrorizes private and public industries on a regular basis.

Definitly civilians, they are not using weapons and they are clearly identifying themselves. You are equating them with terrorists which is hyperbole. In what way can you compare them with Hamas, AQ, JI or the IRA?

They break the law and hurt innocent people to force their opinions on everyone else. They are certainly not violent terrorists, but that doesnt mean they dont scare people trying to earn a living by shutting down businesses.

Greenpeace does not go around killing people. Nor do I see how you can justify murdering people because they have caused a loss of productivity.

They cause the business to lose money which affects all the workers. Those people, unlike Greenpeace terrorists, have to feed families and dont rely on misguided donators.

They did not escalte the violence, they use peaceful means of protest. You are not giving people much of an oppourtunity to protest if they are not even allowed to peacefully do so.

They broke the law in the past and had plans to break it the next morning. Protesting does not equate to breaking the law.

Do as we say or we will kill you is not a democratic stance.

Im not defending the French. I think it was a rather stupid way to go about combating ecoterrorism.. but I have no sympathy for Greenpeace either. The whole pathetic situation of France Vs Greenpeace is quite funny to me.

As a Kiwi, I am against the idea that another nation can go to New Zealand and murder people who are using non violent forms of protest.

I completely agree. I would certainly not support this if I knew it was going to happen. But as an observer, i see no innocent parties in this, and find it quite funny that Greenpeace was treated just as they treat everyone else.

I do not see the irony, they do not go around and blow people up.

But they do go around and try and ruin the lives of people they dont agree with. The side of the story you dont see is the innocent workers on the oil rigs who lose their jobs because Greenpeace wont leave them alone. The corporate fat cats dont feel the effect. :no:

Papewaio

07-18-2005, 06:43

But they do go around and try and ruin the lives of people they dont agree with. The side of the story you dont see is the innocent workers on the oil rigs who lose their jobs because Greenpeace wont leave them alone. The corporate fat cats dont feel the effect. :no:

As someone who as worked in the mining industry I have seen it from the other side. I don't agree with Greenpeace, I just don't think that justifies murdering them. It is a pretty screwed up world where we place corporate profits above human life.

To call them terrorists dilutes the very meaning of the word. And the very real ecoterrorists such as PETA made to look more legitamate by putting them together with Greenpeace.

If nuclear weapons are as safe for the atoll as the French government says then:
A) They are not making them properly.
B) Test them beneath the Eiffel Tower.

Beirut

07-18-2005, 11:54

Greenpeace are not civilians. If anything, they are terrorists themselves.

Indeed.

Imagine the nerve of those terrorists for drawing attention to companies that dump thousands of tons of toxic waste into river and lakes killing hundreds and thousands with cancers and other diseases.

Imagine the nerve of those terrorists for trying to stop people from killing nearly extinct whales to make dog food and perfume.

Imagine the nerve of those terrorists for protesting against chemical testing on dogs and monkeys, where they are rendered immovable and have things like oven cleaner and nail polish remover sprayed in their eyes to see how long it takes them to go blind.

On the other hand, thank God for Bush and the righteous oil companies and the benevolent chemical companies for knowing better and treating us as we should really be treated.

Goodness knows companies Exxon and Union Carbide are run by God fearing, charitable people.

Really, it's true.

:leer: "You are getting sleepy... sleepy..."

InsaneApache

07-18-2005, 12:50

@ PJ I always thought your political stance rather extream. Things in Jagerworld are only black and white. I have to say old chap that you have plumbed new depths with this one. Greenpeace are terrorists!!!!...err no they are not. IRA are terrorist. ETA are terrorists. UDA are terrorists. etc etc etc...now the fundamental point with these types of organisations is that it is THEY who blow people up....on this occasion it was the French government who acted like a terrorist organisation........

dear dear me. :no:

Ja'chyra

07-18-2005, 13:10

Don't think you'll get much support on this one PJ.

ci·vil·ian ( P ) Pronunciation Key (s-vlyn)
n.
A person following the pursuits of civil life, especially one who is not an active member of the military or police.
A specialist in Roman or civil law.

As I can't remember anyone from Greenpeace called Major C Monkeygofree marching in parade formetion while conducting weapons drill then I guess they are civilians after all, Though I would have thought the "Peace" on "Greenpeace" was also a clue.

The Portugese man who was murdered died because he went downstairs to get his camera equipment to get his camera after the first blast, when the second one went off destroying the deck he was on.

Sounds like murder to me, but

In 2005, Admiral Pierre Lacoste, head of DGSE at the time, admitted that the aim of the operation had not been to kill, and that the death weighed heavily on his conscience.

As we all know, it's not a crime unless you meant it, no wait..........it's not a crime if you regret it after, no wait...............

It sounds to me like you are saying that governments have the right to kill anyone that they decide has been objecting about their practices a bit too much, even if they are foreign nationals. Oh, and don't worry about the law, I am the law :dizzy2: :help: In another thread you say:

I disagree with many of my fellow conservatives on this point. I think democracy is messy. I would much rather have a ruling class based on the military.

So what you want is a military dictatorship that will enfoce their rule with whatever means they see as necessary, even to killings? Maybe you should move to Zimbabwe.

Edit: Sorry for going off subject, back on course again.

I think PETA are just a bit strange, for example

spokeswoman for the group's fish empathy project

Missing out the fact that spokesman is not gender specific, fish empathy project?????

the group will give $15,000 worth of soy-based fish products to local schools

If you take the fish out of a fish dish is it still fish? (Try saying that fast 5 times) If you replace the meat with soy would it then be a soy finger, or a soy and ale pie? Not quite as appetising.

Oh well, I suppose it gives them something to do.

Efrem

07-18-2005, 13:17

Green Peace, as all greeny types are scum.

Peta deserve to be put in a cage and mocked. Call me a human supremist but a human life is worth more than an animal life.

Oaty

07-18-2005, 13:36

You thread hijackers, hmmmm guess that makes ya terrorists ~D Anyways make a new thread for greenpeace discussion or lay off the thread.

Anyways as far as PETA goes there main HQ is only 10 miles from where I live. And every year a radio station hosts an annual fishing tournamant, funny how it is always right in front of the offfice. Maybe I should actually go to thier next tournament. ~D

English assassin

07-18-2005, 14:27

What we have here (in PETA and Fishkill, I mean, although on reflection it also applies to the backroom) is an inability to prioritise. Even if I was a lentil munching fish empathiser, I can't help thinking there MUST be bigger issues in the fish world than Fishkill, NY. How about indicting Captain Birdseye, for instance?

However there does seem to be a good money making opportunity here for small towns with nondescript names. Why be, say "Pershore", when you could change your name to "Gerbil-in-a-blender" and be paid to change it back. Who else is oversensitive who might be worth a few quid, hmmm, Bono-is-an-Arse must be worth a punt ?

Beirut

07-18-2005, 15:05

Green Peace, as all greeny types are scum.Peta deserve to be put in a cage and mocked. Call me a human supremist but a human life is worth more than an animal life.

No one is denying that a human's life should be put before an animals life, but it can be argued that human values put us in a moral position to say certain things are bad. Such as torturing animals with chemical tests and dumping toxic chemicals into the water supply.

If you would be so kind, explain unto me why you would write that the people who dump toxic waste into rivers are better than the people who protest against it. You called the "greeny types" scum but not the sludge dumpers.

Slyspy

07-18-2005, 17:42

Beirut

07-18-2005, 18:03

Panzer is an fool and now we all know it.

I disagree with PZ quite often, several of us here do, but I can assure you we do not think him a fool.

Laridus Konivaich

07-18-2005, 18:21

Panzer is an fool and now we all know it. His comments have long since ceased to provide any useful and credible contribution. I feel he does the "Conservative Club" a disfavour by being on their side.So sorry, but I would hope that Senior Members of the .org are above throwing petty insults at other members. Apparently I will be disappointed :no:

Edit: perhaps I should have placed my concerns in a PM, but, what is done, is done.

Ronin

07-18-2005, 18:25

So sorry, but I would hope that Senior Members of the .org are above throwing petty insults at other members. Apparently I will be disappointed :no:.

i would hope that seniour members of the .org are above deserving such insults....but unfortunatelly this topic has foiled my goals yet again.

Goofball

07-18-2005, 18:26

Read it here. (http://www.poughkeepsiejournal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050716/OPINION01/507160321/1004/NEWS)

Words fail me... :laugh: ~D

Idiots.

Don Corleone

07-18-2005, 18:50

PETA are a bunch of morons. They protested a violin company because they didn't know that catgut wasn't. They constantly are getting boycotts raised against themselves for their boycots.... NOW (National Organization for Women) go apeshit with their "I'd rather wear nothing then wear fur" campaigns and if I remember correctly, the AMA & MADD got all over them for their "Drink beer, not milk" campaign.

EDIT:: Just for the record, does anybody know a group that supports humane treatment of animals that's not a bunch of whackjobs? I support treating animals fairly decently until it comes time to slaughter them, and I do my best to eat free range eggs & meat. Wolves don't pity sheep and go for tofu, but they don't torture them either.

Steppe Merc

07-18-2005, 18:51

Don Corleone

07-18-2005, 18:53

Panzer is an fool and now we all know it. His comments have long since ceased to provide any useful and credible contribution. I feel he does the "Conservative Club" a disfavour by being on their side.

While we certainly appreciate your concern, by the right of free association, the Conservative Club is quite happy to exercise it's right to keep Panzer in its ranks. I many not agree with Panzer on everything he says (nor he I) yet I feel it's a strength that we allow dissent on our side of the aisle. I wouldn't do well in a political ideology that requires such a dogmatic approach. As for the namecalling, maybe you're unaware that while you think you sound cool, it comes off as "I have nothing better to say so blah blah blah".

Crazed Rabbit

07-18-2005, 19:41

I won't even go into this. I just have to say that animal life and the enviornment outways every single time the profits of buisnesses. Every single time.
PETA and groups have no right to destroy property. However, they have every right to stage protests.

How far will you go in enforcing this?

If it costs a company $1billion to clean up just a tiny bit more waste than before- is it worth it to force the company to do this, thus making the company go out of business?

We must weigh the marginal cleaness gained by requiring less pollution against how much effort its going to take to clean the last remaining bit of pollution up.

Crazed Rabbit

PanzerJaeger

07-18-2005, 19:54

Big_John

07-18-2005, 20:01

EDIT:: Just for the record, does anybody know a group that supports humane treatment of animals that's not a bunch of whackjobs? I support treating animals fairly decently until it comes time to slaughter them, and I do my best to eat free range eggs & meat.i don't know much about either organization, but i don't hear people complain about the ASPCA or the american humane society that much. good job on the free-range meats, good for the animals (until you eat them :evilgrin:) and better tasting to boot!

Wolves don't pity sheep and go for tofu, but they don't torture them either.just fyi.. while "cruelty" may connote a human intent, certainly animals can exhibit what would probably be considered torturous behavior. wild cats, as an example, often bring live prey back to their cubs. the cubs can "play" with the animals for long periods of time before they are eventually killed (or die of exhaustion). domestic cats attempt to do something similar when they bring live mice/birds/etc home to their owners. it's theorized that this behavior evolved as a way to teach cubs/kittens how to hunt. still, it seems fairly torturous to the victim.

killer whales do something similar with penguins and seals, but i don't think people have come up with a good theory for that behavior other than simply having fun (the killer whale, that is). so it might be even more akin to cruelty.

isn't nature fuzzy? :nice:

Steppe Merc

07-18-2005, 20:42

How far will you go in enforcing this?

If it costs a company $1billion to clean up just a tiny bit more waste than before- is it worth it to force the company to do this, thus making the company go out of business?

We must weigh the marginal cleaness gained by requiring less pollution against how much effort its going to take to clean the last remaining bit of pollution up.
This is one argument. However, the idea of "just a tiny bit more" is far too slippery. Is it an ounce, or hundreds of liters (well, it's a little bit compared to thousands!)? I believe it's called a slipery slope.

Big John, I am aware of certaint animal's actions when playing with their prey. However, it is totally different than torturing animals without eating them, or that were bred for that purpose. And of course the predators almost always eat their prey, unlike us humans.

Big_John

07-18-2005, 21:48

Big John, I am aware of certaint animal's actions when playing with their prey. However, it is totally different than torturing animals without eating them, or that were bred for that purpose. And of course the predators almost always eat their prey, unlike us humans.well, the difference is somewhat subjective (and it's not like animals don't kill each other for non-predation reasons), but i'm not trying to make any argument about the acceptability of human cruelty towards animals. i was just noting that other animals can exhibit torturous behavior; behavior which if exhibited by a human would be considered "cruel"... simply because i thought it interesting.

anyway, the problem i have with a group like peta is that they are run by radical, ideological vegans. if they were simply another organization that promoted the ethical treatment of animals, that'd be fine. but too often it seems like they equate the value of a cow to that of a human. to me, that's nonsense. and this fishkill case? i mean come on. i actually had to check snopes to makes sure this wasn't a hoax; it's that outlandish.

i'm all for doing away with the awful conditions found at feed lots, slaughter houses, and the like. i buy all (iirc) of my meat.. indeed, pretty much 95% of my total food from local farmers' markets; all my meat is free-range. but people like those that run peta have a problem with the very idea of food-animals. if someone tries to take my meat away from me, i will break them. :bow:

Xiahou

07-18-2005, 22:00

i don't know much about either organization, but i don't hear people complain about the ASPCA or the american humane society that much. good job on the free-range meats, good for the animals (until you eat them :evilgrin:) and better tasting to boot! Both the ASPCA and American Humane Society are both opposed to hunting- but other than that, they seem at least semi-reasonable. AHS in particular seems to be interested in humane livestock treatment.

note: Don't confuse the American Human society with the Humane Society of the United States, which are apparently jerks (http://activistcash.com/organization_overview.cfm/oid/136).

BDC

07-18-2005, 22:10

These animal-rights terrorists (the ones who attack researchers and those associated with animal research) really need to be sorted out, it's horrific that a tiny segment of society can cripple medical research.

Although as far as I'm concerned exactly the same applies to those who get in the way of stem cell research etc.

At least the animal rights activists don't generally kill those they target, which is more than can said for some anti-abortion groups. Same extremists, slightly different excuse to kill and feel powerful.

Ronin

07-18-2005, 22:32

Beirut

07-18-2005, 22:44

Well this fool is ready to admit "terrorists" was a bad description of Greenpeace. They are not terrorists in the full sense of the word.

However, I do think that when they traipse around the world and disregard the law, private property, and the rights of other people to force your political opinions on everyone else, they shouldnt play the victim when they get hit back.

I believe the saying goes "If you cant stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.", or something like that..

"In the full sense of the word". Interesting. Let's see, they don't kill people, they don't kidnap people, they don't set off bombs, they don't fly airplanes into buildings, they don't strap C4 to themselves, so what is it they do that makes them terrorists in the "partial sense of the word"?

Hang posters and banners on smokestacks?

Just for the record, I would much rather have Greenpeace inflict it's political opinion on me by making me see a fifty foot banner saying "Stop pollution!" than have Union Carbide blow off 5000 liters of cyanide gas into the air beside my town.

Or do you prefer the poison gas because it's Republican based and smells of free enterprise?

PanzerJaeger

07-18-2005, 23:05

Maybe I didnt make myself clear.. I was wrong to call them terrorists.

However, I think you are letting your own opinions of Greenpeace get in the way.

-They do try to intimidate businesses they dont like by threatening, and carrying out raids.

-They disregard the law to shut businesses they dont agree with down.

-They ignore and destroy private property to get what they want.

-They harass workers in industries they dont agree with.

-They hurt honest working people around the globe in their crusade against corporations. Shutting down a manufacturing plant for a week and harassing people at the dealership wont hurt John Ford III, he'll just lay off those workers and focus on another brand that Greenpeace doesnt have an issue with.

Thats not terrorism, but its certainly far beyond innocent protesting.

You work in the lumber industry no? How would you like it if a bunch of Greenpeace folks came onto your place of business, tied themselves to trees, sabotaged your equipment, and called you every name under the sun? What if you lost your pay?

Steppe Merc

07-18-2005, 23:09

anyway, the problem i have with a group like peta is that they are run by radical, ideological vegans. if they were simply another organization that promoted the ethical treatment of animals, that'd be fine. but too often it seems like they equate the value of a cow to that of a human. to me, that's nonsense. and this fishkill case? i mean come on. i actually had to check snopes to makes sure this wasn't a hoax; it's that outlandish.
I agree. It is silly. However, it is far worse to paint them all as evil terrorist, because while they are far too zealous, they want what any decent person would want: treat animals kindly.

Both the ASPCA and American Humane Society are both opposed to hunting- but other than that, they seem at least semi-reasonable. AHS in particular seems to be interested in humane livestock treatment.
Which is why the ASPCA and the AHS is better and does things. A stable by me got busted for abuse, and my Mom is working with two of the horses that were in best condition. They were worked 12 hours a day, and not fed because they couldn't work hard enough (because they didn't have enough food... :dizzy2: ).
About hunting, I've changed my mind since visting this forum, though like all things, hunting needs to be far more moderate (ie, no more automatics, or snipers, just shotguns).

Evil_Maniac From Mars

07-19-2005, 00:07

*finishes grilling a whitefish*
*roars with laughter*

scooter_the_shooter

07-19-2005, 00:29

Beirut

07-19-2005, 00:52

~D
Maybe I didnt make myself clear.. I was wrong to call them terrorists.

However, I think you are letting your own opinions of Greenpeace get in the way.

-They do try to intimidate businesses they dont like by threatening, and carrying out raids.

-They disregard the law to shut businesses they dont agree with down.

-They ignore and destroy private property to get what they want.

-They harass workers in industries they dont agree with.

-They hurt honest working people around the globe in their crusade against corporations. Shutting down a manufacturing plant for a week and harassing people at the dealership wont hurt John Ford III, he'll just lay off those workers and focus on another brand that Greenpeace doesnt have an issue with.

Thats not terrorism, but its certainly far beyond innocent protesting.

You work in the lumber industry no? How would you like it if a bunch of Greenpeace folks came onto your place of business, tied themselves to trees, sabotaged your equipment, and called you every name under the sun? What if you lost your pay?

Greenpeace mounts raids against corporations who deserve it. It's a form of civil disobedience. Just like Rosa Parks saying no, that she will not sit at the back of the bus so a white man can have her seat. That was against the law as well, and people called her all kinds of horrible names, but she did it anyway because it was the right thing to do.

Likewise, Greenpeace commits acts of civil disobedience to draw attention to mega-corporations who would just as soon kill the half of us to make a fat profit off the other half. I'm no screaming-weenie tree hugger, but even I know that dumping thousands of tons of dioxin laced sludge into a water supply is not a terribly good thing to do. Someone needs to speak up against these outrages. Greenpeace does. I don't agree with everything they do, but I love it when they humiliate some fat corporation that is killing the environment.

I'm not in the lumber industry really, I'm a one-on-one tree killer. ~D Most of what we do is dangerous and technical takedowns. Trees over houses, over hydro lines, that sort of thing. One thing I can tell you is everyone who works with us has a very healthy and strong view towards the environment. Just as it is hunters who best understand conservation, it is tree cutters who best understand the forest. We know what can be cut and what should never be cut. And we do refuse to cut some trees if the reason is not satisfactory. We know that what is going on with the clear cutting in north Quebec is nothing less than environmental suicide.

I don't think Greepeace would have too much of a problem with us. We're good boys. ~:smoking:

PanzerJaeger

07-19-2005, 01:51

Greenpeace mounts raids against corporations who deserve it. It's a form of civil disobedience. Just like Rosa Parks saying no, that she will not sit at the back of the bus so a white man can have her seat. That was against the law as well, and people called her all kinds of horrible names, but she did it anyway because it was the right thing to do.

Wrong, its illegal invasion of private property. It demeans Rosa Parks to compare these people to her. She was not on a crusade to ruin what she didnt agree with.

Likewise, Greenpeace commits acts of civil disobedience to draw attention to mega-corporations who would just as soon kill the half of us to make a fat profit off the other half. I'm no screaming-weenie tree hugger, but even I know that dumping thousands of tons of dioxin laced sludge into a water supply is not a terribly good thing to do. Someone needs to speak up against these outrages. Greenpeace does. I don't agree with everything they do, but I love it when they humiliate some fat corporation that is killing the environment.

You can glorify criminals all you like, that doesnt make them any less of criminals.

I cant go into your house and handcuff myself to your furniture and call it civil disobedience. Thats essentially what Greenpeace does.

The only people Greenpeace humiliates are people trying to make an honest days living, not mooch off the misplaced good intentions of guilty people.

Beirut

07-19-2005, 02:04

Wrong, its illegal invasion of private property.

You can glorify criminals all you like, that doesnt make them any less of criminals.

Well, if Greenpeace are such heinous criminals in your view for committing the horrible crimes of trespassing and the occasional vandalism, what are your views towards those who knowingly dump thousands of tons of poison into rivers and lakes, endangering hundreds of thousands of people, and try to keep it secret for years and years, all because their profit margin says they should?

I have yet to hear you say one bad word about the corporations who are killing people, I have only heard you things about those who protest against the corporations who are killing people.

Steppe Merc

07-19-2005, 02:38

steppe NO ONE uses full auto for hunting The things cost to much ~D

If you meant semi auto most states only let you use 5 to 7 rounds in your gun any way.

Sniper rifles what do you call a sniper rifle could I put a cheap scope on my single shot 22.. and all the sudden its a evil sniper rifle to powerful for hunting :dizzy2: I think you should be able to use what ever you want for hunting. wether it be a rusty old shot gun a fancy tricked out 30/06 or one of those "evil assault weapons" ~:)

Let me tell you a story

In county(yes county not country for you europeans out there ~D ) near mine that had very harsh hunting restrictions (no rifles only one deer a year slugs only etc :furious3: ) The hunters couldn't kill enough deer so after deer season they pay a company 450 thousand dollars to come shoot deer. If the just let us use our @#@% rifles and back shot and let us kill 2 or 3 deer they would have saved alot of money
We have problems in my town with deer too. However, there ought to be some fighting chance for the deer to escape. And the hunters had better have been eating that deer (and damn it takes good! The first time I got the munchies I had deer jerky, great stuff. Though it made me even more thirsty than from cotton mouth... anyway...)
Oh, and I can't really tell an auto from a semi any way, so I'll beleive you. ~D

And Beriut, thank you for making all your arguments very well, so I don't have to try and explain them very poorly, since they essentially the same... :bow:

Papewaio

07-19-2005, 05:36

Maybe I didnt make myself clear.. I was wrong to call them terrorists.

However, I think you are letting your own opinions of Greenpeace get in the way.

...

You work in the lumber industry no? How would you like it if a bunch of Greenpeace folks came onto your place of business, tied themselves to trees, sabotaged your equipment, and called you every name under the sun? What if you lost your pay?

It is kind of funny that the two guys defending Greenpeace are the Lumberjack and the ex-Mine Worker...

PanzerJaeger

07-19-2005, 06:19

Well, if Greenpeace are such heinous criminals in your view for committing the horrible crimes of trespassing and the occasional vandalism, what are your views towards those who knowingly dump thousands of tons of poison into rivers and lakes, endangering hundreds of thousands of people, and try to keep it secret for years and years, all because their profit margin says they should?

I have yet to hear you say one bad word about the corporations who are killing people, I have only heard you things about those who protest against the corporations who are killing people.

Ohh the evil corporations. ~:rolleyes:

The other side of the story is that these companies provide jobs and services that people rely on. If they are in fact, as you claim, killing people you should petition your government to stop them.

If they break the law, they should be punished by the government of the country in which the law was broken. There is absolutely no place for vigilanties to pass arbitrary judgement on a company and punish it.

If that is the case, whats to stop a company from using criminal activity to fight back?

Ser Clegane

07-19-2005, 08:08

If they break the law, they should be punished by the government of the country in which the law was broken. There is absolutely no place for vigilanties to pass arbitrary judgement on a company and punish it.

Of course that is what should be happening - and I believe that actually happens (and this is a risk that the Greenpeace people are willing to take).

I have not seen anybody here who claims that Greenpeace should be above the law.
However, sending out a commando to a sovereign nation in order to blow up a Greenpeace ship (not caring whether there are people on board or not) has nothing to do with applying the law.

Beirut

07-19-2005, 11:55

Ohh the evil corporations. ~:rolleyes:

The other side of the story is that these companies provide jobs and services that people rely on. If they are in fact, as you claim, killing people you should petition your government to stop them.

The problem is that the corporations line the pockets of government so that the authorities turn a blind eye. It is through public pressure that change occurs. That public pressure is spawned by movements like Greenpeace who make the people aware of corporate transgressions and force the government to make changes.

If they break the law, they should be punished by the government of the country in which the law was broken. There is absolutely no place for vigilanties to pass arbitrary judgement on a company and punish it.

Sure there is. When a company that pollutes and endangers the public will not stop, and the government will not force it to stop, then it is up to the people to make it stop.

Aren't you for the carrying of handguns? Why don't you just petition the government of your country to control crime? Why should you act the vigilante and pass arbitrary judgement on an individual and punish him?

If you feel one person has the right to act outside the norms of civilized behaviour to protect himself, why cannot a group of people act outside the norms of civilized behaviour to protect themselves?

If that is the case, whats to stop a company from using criminal activity to fight back?

They do. They also have millions and millions and millions for lawyers to tie up the courts for years to avoid making changes. Meanwhile, people continue to get sick and die and the company goes on making it's profits over their dead bodies.

I am still curious why you are so hot tempered about Greenpeace and their heinous acts of trespassing, but yet you remain calm, cool, and diplomatic when speaking of companies that dump thousands of tons of poisonous waste into the water supply.

Do you really believe that Greepeace climbing a smokestack and hanging a banner is a more horrible act than a company dumping dioxin sludge into rivers and lakes?

Fragony

07-19-2005, 12:21

If I was ever to eat a dolphin salad PETA made me do it. What a bunch of morons.

Redleg

07-19-2005, 13:10

Well, if Greenpeace are such heinous criminals in your view for committing the horrible crimes of trespassing and the occasional vandalism, what are your views towards those who knowingly dump thousands of tons of poison into rivers and lakes, endangering hundreds of thousands of people, and try to keep it secret for years and years, all because their profit margin says they should?

I have yet to hear you say one bad word about the corporations who are killing people, I have only heard you things about those who protest against the corporations who are killing people.

What about the knuckleheads who spike trees with long nails in their effort to keep lumberjacks from cutting down trees. Are they conducting peaceful protest - or are they committing an act of violence. If they leave a sign saying they spiked the trees - does it remove them from any fault of injury or death to the timber workers or saw mill workers that could be harmed by the spike.

http://richmond.indymedia.org/newswire/display/301/www.vjac.org

scooter_the_shooter

07-19-2005, 15:28

They oughta chain the tree huggers to a tree and leave them because of those spikes :furious3:

PanzerJaeger

07-19-2005, 19:09

The problem is that the corporations line the pockets of government so that the authorities turn a blind eye. It is through public pressure that change occurs. That public pressure is spawned by movements like Greenpeace who make the people aware of corporate transgressions and force the government to make changes.

Public pressure does not extend to criminal activity.

If you feel one person has the right to act outside the norms of civilized behaviour to protect himself, why cannot a group of people act outside the norms of civilized behaviour to protect themselves?

It is perfectly acceptable behavior to protect yourself. Who is Greenpeace protecting by trying to destroy companies?

They do. They also have millions and millions and millions for lawyers to tie up the courts for years to avoid making changes. Meanwhile, people continue to get sick and die and the company goes on making it's profits over their dead bodies.

Every year the life expectancy goes up and up, and more cures for diseases are found by big medical corporations. Maybe things are different in Canada.. ~:eek:

I am still curious why you are so hot tempered about Greenpeace and their heinous acts of trespassing, but yet you remain calm, cool, and diplomatic when speaking of companies that dump thousands of tons of poisonous waste into the water supply.

Im not going to respond to a fixed question.

Do you really believe that Greepeace climbing a smokestack and hanging a banner is a more horrible act than a company dumping dioxin sludge into rivers and lakes?

I believe Greenpeace harrassing people who try to buy my favorite vehicle at the dealership translates into lost profits and puts the whole marque in jeapardy. Land Rover doesnt dump anything, anywhere. People simply dont have the right to disregard the law and attempt to destroy a company or a person they disagree with.

Big_John

07-19-2005, 19:38

What about the knuckleheads who spike trees [...]

http://richmond.indymedia.org/newswire/display/301/www.vjac.orgis greenpeace involved with the ELF?

Beirut

07-19-2005, 19:53

What about the knuckleheads who spike trees with long nails in their effort to keep lumberjacks from cutting down trees. Are they conducting peaceful protest - or are they committing an act of violence. If they leave a sign saying they spiked the trees - does it remove them from any fault of injury or death to the timber workers or saw mill workers that could be harmed by the spike.

http://richmond.indymedia.org/newswire/display/301/www.vjac.org

Without a doubt I would be inclined to thrash the weenie who spiked my tree.

On the other hand, I am green enough to know what should and what should not be cut. Though it may sound like BS, there are trees I would simply refuse to cut based on my environmental views. I've refused to cut trees before and I'm sure I will again. The point is, at what point is the worker responsible for his actions? A paycheck does not wipe the slate clean if the worker has done something he knows to be wrong.

In general though, spiking trees is a bad idea because it is a hidden danger, akin to a land mine. Having your chain slip off the bar and remain there is no big deal. Happens all the time. But metal inside a tree can snap the chain and cause it to whiplash or come right off the bar. That's a bad thing with a chain turning at 12,000+ RPMs. If you're going to spike a tree you damn well better leave a few inches of spike on the outside so people know it's there.

Redleg

07-19-2005, 20:21

is greenpeace involved with the ELF?

There has been allegations of such a link - but since ELF is not a group but a loose band of cell the allegations can not be confirmed. Greenpeace denies any involvement with ELF.

Big_John

07-19-2005, 20:37

can spiking kill a tree? that would be ironic..

Kaiser of Arabia

07-19-2005, 20:38

Ok Greenies.

I don't like Microsoft, ok? Would that make it right if I broke into their faciilties and destroyed countless hours of research? No.

Same logic with Greenpeace.

These morons and criminals should be lined up and, one by one, have a 9 inch iron nail hammered into their backs. Not deadly, not nessissarily deadly anyway, but that will remind them who they are dealing with.

If we did that, I'm willing to bet the raids would stop at that moment.

Ser Clegane

07-19-2005, 20:41

These morons and criminals should be lined up and, one by one, have a 9 inch iron nail hammered into their backs. Not deadly, not nessissarily deadly anyway, but that will remind them who they are dealing with.

Could you please refrain from giving us details on your wet dreams how you would treat people who you do not like in every other thread you post in?

Thanks :bow:

Ser Clegane

Kaiser of Arabia

07-19-2005, 20:49

Could you please refrain from giving us details on your wet dreams how you would treat people who you do not like in every other thread you post in?

Thanks :bow:

Ser Clegane
How about every third?
Oh and a few things wrong with that post...
1. Can't you take a little satire? Too much to handle for ya? ~:cool:
2. No wetness to the dreams about it, I'm not a sadist, sorry ~:)
3. It's every fourth thread, dude, not every other ~:cheers:

Ser Clegane

07-19-2005, 20:57

1. Can't you take a little satire? Too much to handle for ya? ~:cool:

I tend to get impatient when the spectrum of satire is too narrow - spare us the repitition.

Steppe Merc

07-19-2005, 21:04

Microsoft doesn't torture animals, Kaiser.

Kaiser of Arabia

07-19-2005, 21:12

They torture people though. You have no idea how many bottles of perscription strenth painkillers i've been through oin their account!

scooter_the_shooter

07-19-2005, 22:26

:furious3: Animal rights activist are just morons not that their message isn't good (though they are waaaaaaay over board to the point they value animals more then us) but the way they get it across is pathetic all they do is Pi$$ people off by laying in the middle of high ways. Chaining them selves to what ever they can find and generally just causing annoyance. And their stupid hunger strikes.

Beirut

07-20-2005, 00:16

can spiking kill a tree? that would be ironic..

I think a copper spike would. Could be brass but I'm pretty sure it's copper.

I still don't understand why some people who decry, with great passion and even violence, those who protest on behalf of a better environment or the rights of animals, have expressed no real emotion at all about those who spread disease and sickness amongst entire populations merely to benefit their profit margin, nor those who torture dogs and monkeys in horrendous and despicable ways.

Some people here are outraged that others "put animal life ahead of human life". What about putting the rights of a sewage pipe above those of your kids?

Redleg

07-20-2005, 00:31

I think a copper spike would. Could be brass but I'm pretty sure it's copper.

I think the only metals that wont kill the tree is steel and iron spikes. I think the rest seep into the wood and kills the tissue - but I am not postive either

I still don't understand why some people who decry, with great passion and even violence, those who protest on behalf of a better environment or the rights of animals, have expressed no real emotion at all about those who spread disease and sickness amongst entire populations merely to benefit their profit margin, nor those who torture dogs and monkeys in horrendous and despicable ways.

Because they confuse corporate profit and human interests over that of the environment?

I don't like PETA because of their desire to prevent me from hunting and fishing if they can get their way. When groups like the ASPCA comes my way - I normally donate money and time to that organization - I often find my dogs thru them also. The organizations do some good - however some of the far looney fringe of the groups go do far - as evident in the attempt by PETA to change the name of a town.

Some people here are outraged that others "put animal life ahead of human life". What about putting the rights of a sewage pipe above those of your kids?

I say bash the sewage pipes - and fine the "crap" out of any corporation or industry that disregrads establish laws and safeguards met to protect the environment for the all might buck. However that doesn't mean I will ever support the Kyoto Agreement which will set false condtions and standards in order to reduce emmissions from some countries but gives a pass on others.

The current regulations on the environment for the United States need to be enforced before we enter into any world wide agreement.