| A Web site http://www.petakillsanimals.com/ is reporting that PETA has secretly destroyed thousands of animals rather than adopting them out which the site claims is a matter of economics over ethics. Click the picture to see the report and click HERE to see the supporting documentation. "In 2000, when the Associated Press first noted PETA's Kervorkian-esque tendencies, PETA president Ingrid Newkirk complained that actually taking care of animals costs more than killing them. "We could become a no-kill shelter immediately," she admitted." People ask why I report on these negative things; if you cannot trust an organization designed to spare animals and push the ethical treatment of animals, then who do you trust? How do I know who is right? How can I know? If you read the PETA site you will see many wonderful things being done. Click on the picture of the pigs below to get there. What I do know is that deception is the mainstay of controversy and confusion is the bedfellow of doubt. Keep the masses with a migraine long enough and no one will give a damn about the truth. The truth is too hard to find. I maintain, sadly, that corruption and greed, ignorance and excess has turned our world upside down. And if you are a history buff you will easily see the parallels between our current state and that of the Roman Empire as it spiraled toward the end of its existence. I maintain that Abraham Lincoln's famous quote should be rewritten as follows: You can fool some of the people some of the time and you can confuse the rest of the people the rest of the time. So much for ethics. MisterWriter |
Sunday, March 29, 2009
PETA RECORDS REVEAL DIRTY SECRET - IT IS CHEAPER TO KILL ANIMALS THAN ADOPT THEM. BUT IS THAT ALL THERE IS TO THE STORY? AND WHO KNOWS THE TRUTH?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)


2 comments:
So sad.
I didn't know PETA ran a shelter? Do they mean animals they get from labs or other inhumane treatment? Knowing people in the horse industry, I've come to realize a humane euthanasia is sometimes better than an inhumane placement if animal isn't equipped to be adopted, or if it is too "damaged" to be adopted. I don't know the facts here , and I would NEVER defend PETA , but I'm not anti-euthanasia ... if done for the right reasons. There just aren't enough homes. And for a "damaged" animal or for one who requires special treatment or handling or rehab, the list of suitable homes dwindles even more.
Post a Comment