# The PETA Merged Thread



## PMedMoe (28 Aug 2008)

Definitely not a promotion for PETA by any means!  It's a pretty funny article but I have a feeling it's only a matter of time before they (PETA) come out with some new (and offensive) advertising campaign using this latest news.  Of course, it won't matter if you point out that Listeria can be found in cheese, mushrooms, soil, etc...... :

Article Link

Dear PETA, 

Please take note: That's "dear," not "deer" -- I wouldn't want get off on the wrong foot here, accused of exploiting ungulates for my own selfish salutational purposes. 

Anyway, I'm hoping everyone is feeling well at the offices of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. 

I'm concerned, having scoured in vain for any reference to you and your spokespeople in the Canadian media over the past week. 

You see, here in Canada -- it's the country with the big rodeo and seal-clubbing, remember? -- well, we're having a bit of an issue with a nasty bacteria called listeria.

More on link


----------



## medicineman (28 Aug 2008)

:rofl:

MM


----------



## gt102 (28 Aug 2008)

:

PETA... They have a habit of just going too far and making a mockery of themselves. Great ideology behind the movement, just not the correct application of it.


----------



## Jungle (28 Aug 2008)

Maybe the leadership at PETA became sick themselves after secretly eating some meat processed at establishment 97B  >

I am a member of PETA myself: PETA = People who Eat Tasty Animals


----------



## brihard (29 Aug 2008)

The trouble with many of these sorts of organizations is that, although worthy to some degree, and usually with a solid positive sentiment behind them, they're so desperate for a following that they end up being composed of radicals who drive away reasonable, sympathetic people who might otherwise support their efforts...

I'm all for looking after the environment, treating animals humanely, etc, but so many of those people are just whackos...


----------



## TN2IC (1 Sep 2008)

Encore!!!


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (18 Jun 2009)

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20090618/obama_peta_090618/20090618?hub=World



> PETA wishes Obama hadn't swatted that fly
> 
> Updated Thu. Jun. 18 2009 8:36 AM ET
> 
> ...


----------



## Old Sweat (18 Jun 2009)

Was the fly named Tanya?


----------



## mariomike (18 Jun 2009)

"That was pretty impressive, wasn't it? I got the sucker."
.............................................

He's a real tough guy.
But, remember the "Shawinigan Handshake" our guy was known for?
Let's see him top that!


----------



## vonGarvin (18 Jun 2009)

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> Was the fly named Tanya?


:rofl:  Great.  You owe me one new, coffee-free keyboard!

;D


----------



## PMedMoe (18 Jun 2009)

"swatting a fly on TV indicates he's not perfect,"

Oh, and PETA members are, right?   :


----------



## Haggis (18 Jun 2009)

mariomike said:
			
		

> He's a real tough guy.
> But, remember the "Shawinigan Handshake" our guy was known for?
> Let's see him top that!



Let's have a Harper/Obama matchoff.  Winner gets to determine which country Akwesasne belongs in.


----------



## beach_bum (18 Jun 2009)

Boy PETA would hate me.  In my house being the one who kills spiders and all other creepy crawlies has made me a hero.


----------



## Lil_T (18 Jun 2009)

holy, it's a fly, it's not like he clubbed and skinned a baby seal on national television.


----------



## ENGINEERS WIFE (17 Jul 2009)

PETA suggests nondairy MJ statue
Instead of using butter, how about a nondairy spread?


updated 4:50 p.m. MT, Wed., July 15, 2009
DES MOINES, Iowa - People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals have come up with an idea for sculptor Sarah Pratt and the Iowa State Fair — instead of using butter for a Michael Jackson sculpture, how about a nondairy spread?

Officials with the fair, known for its butter cow, announced days after Jackson's death that they also would display a sculpture of the King of Pop. Last Wednesday, they said they would let the public decide in an online ballot.

Iowa State Fair marketing director Lori Chappell said as of Tuesday more than 70,000 people have voted on the Web site. Chappell said early on, most people voted `no.' Since then, there has been a surge of `yes' votes.

PETA recommends using something called "Earth Balance," which it describes as a "nondairy buttery spread" if there is a Jackson sculpture

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31927261/ns/us_news-weird_news/


What more can ya say?  OMFG,  a non dairy MJ statue......WHO CARES???!!??   :blotto:


----------



## vonGarvin (17 Jul 2009)

A margarine spread statue of MJ would be the fitting tribute, IMHO.  He was artificial and mostly plastic.  Same with margarine.


I don't know why "People Eating Tasty Animals" have anything against the King of Pop, though...


----------



## Eye In The Sky (17 Jul 2009)

Warning!  Warning!


----------



## OldSolduer (17 Jul 2009)

But I lost the roll of tinfoil 

Drats!


----------



## mariomike (17 Aug 2009)

"PETA asks N.S. fisherman to spare lobster believed to be more than 100 years-old":
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/090814/koddities/oddity_lobster_appeal


----------



## Eye In The Sky (17 Aug 2009)

> People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) is asking Beau Gillis to let the old lobster live by allowing a PETA lobster liberator to help release him.



WTF is a lobster liberator.  Hey, they can liberate this lobster right into my stock pot if they want.  I'll take good care of it!

It must be the heat in Nova Scotia this week that is making people stupid like this.


----------



## Danjanou (17 Aug 2009)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> WTF is a lobster liberator.  Hey, they can liberate this lobster right into my stock pot if they want.  I'll take good care of it!
> 
> It must be the heat in Nova Scotia this week that is making people stupid like this.



You sure it was the heat this past weekend?  8)
http://www.ndp.ca/hfx09


----------



## Eye In The Sky (18 Aug 2009)

Thats it!  I am having my water tested for lead content.


----------



## kratz (20 Aug 2009)

PETA has made the local news in Halifax. They are offering the HRM the funds to fix the sewage treatment plant in exchange for naming rights on the plant. 
Their name for the plant would be..."Seal Slaughter Stinks Plant"  :-X

Here's the story from the Chronicle Herald



> PETA seals offer to pay for sewage plant
> By JEFFREY SIMPSON Staff Reporter
> Thu. Aug 20 - 4:47 AM
> 
> ...



More at link


----------



## kratz (16 Sep 2009)

Another protest by PETA. I like the looks of the costume. It's giving me ideas for Halloween.

from the Chronicle Herald



> PETA protesters arrested at Canadian embassy
> Activists dressed as seals show up at Washington site
> By The Canadian Press
> Wed. Sep 16 - 11:30 AM
> ...


----------



## mariomike (16 Sep 2009)

Bill Maher sparked outrage as a board member of P.E.T.A.:
http://www.news.com.au/common/imagedata/0,,5291198,00.jpg
National Post: "PETA compares bus decapitation to animal slaughters":
http://www.nationalpost.com/story.html?id=705090


----------



## GAP (16 Sep 2009)

kratz said:
			
		

> Another protest by PETA. I like the looks of the costume. It's giving me ideas for Halloween.
> from the Chronicle Herald





> Three animal rights activists protesting seal hunting have been arrested in front of the Canadian Embassy in Washington.
> 
> U.S. Secret Service spokesman Ed Donovan said officers arrested three members of PETA on Wednesday morning on charges of disorderly conduct, unlawful assembly and failure to obey.
> 
> The women taken into custody wore white seal costumes streaked in red paint to represent blood.



Let me get this straight...we haven't banned the seal hunt...so......let's just reopen it and get rid of those seals in front of the US Embassy.... >


----------



## OldSolduer (16 Sep 2009)

GAP you are a genius...devious to be sure but a genius none the less! >


----------



## kratz (16 Sep 2009)

Ouch!! Maybe a seal costum for Halloween is not such a great idea. At least around GAP.


----------



## c_canuk (16 Sep 2009)

or we could take a bunch of them to train as attack sea dogs... they are pretty vicious and territorial, wouldn't be long before the seals start taking out trespassing protestors, giving them a close up on exactly how "cute and cuddly" the things are.


----------



## vonGarvin (16 Sep 2009)

PETA will be happy to note that I have 160 pounds of pork, bacon and ham in my freezer, all from a pig I raised myself.  Yum!

 ;D


----------



## Old Sweat (16 Sep 2009)

Midnight Rambler said:
			
		

> PETA will be happy to note that I have 160 pounds of pork, bacon and ham in my freezer, all from a pig I raised myself.  Yum!
> 
> ;D



And what are you going to tell them about your relationship with the chickens that produced the eggs you had for breakfast with your home-grown bacon?


----------



## vonGarvin (16 Sep 2009)

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> And what are you going to tell them about your relationship with the chickens that produced the eggs you had for breakfast with your home-grown bacon?


If men can marry men, then I can "encourage" my chickens to make eggs in any way I desire



 >


----------



## Jammer (16 Sep 2009)

ROTFLMAO......!!!!!


----------



## danchapps (16 Sep 2009)

I hate to admit, but I am in fact a card carrying member of PETA!

People Eating Tasty Animals!!!


----------



## Steel Badger (17 Sep 2009)

They really become upset when you insist that PETA stands for : "People for the Eating of Tasty Animals"


----------



## danchapps (17 Sep 2009)

Steel Badger said:
			
		

> They really become upset when you insist that PETA stands for : "People for the Eating of Tasty Animals"



But it's oh so true!

I have a bumper sticker on my tool box that says "I love defenseless animals.... Especially good in gravy!"


----------



## Kat Stevens (17 Sep 2009)

If God/Buddha/Allah/Yahweh/FSM didn't want us to eat animals, why did he/she/it/they make them out of delicious meat?


----------



## FDO (17 Sep 2009)

OK getting  back to original topic of flies. So I get one of these humane fly release things and I catch one of the little darlings and let him go out side my home in Canada in February. I have done the humane thing and not squished him in stead he freezes to death! Or it goes outside in June and straight into the gaping maw of a local bird. Makes sense to me!

I guess its true. Some people have nothing better to do. Maybe they should get actual jobs. If they pay more taxes I can get a raise, retire sooner and live in the sunny south and never kill a fly in Canada again!

Go PETA GO!!


----------



## mariomike (25 Nov 2009)

Ad claims turkey torture:
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/offbeat/2009/11/24/pkg.moos.banned.turkey.ad.cnn


----------



## wannabe SF member (25 Jan 2010)

It seems Gail Shea, the fisheries minister has been assaulted by a PETA activist with a creampie to protest seal hunting in Canada. 

Here's the article:
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/posted/archive/2010/01/25/seal-hunt-protester-pies-fisheries-minister.aspx

Here's a video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QiEIX-uirGY

 :


----------



## Spanky (25 Jan 2010)

That PETA loser should be in jail.   :rage:


----------



## PMedMoe (25 Jan 2010)

In that article it says that the incident was not organized by PETA, but they certainly used it to make one of their moronic statements:



> In a statement following the incident, PETA executive vice-president Tracy Reiman said: “A little tofu pie on her face is hardly comparable to the blood on Ms. Shea’s hands.”


 :

My signature line is finally appropriate!!   ;D


----------



## OldSolduer (25 Jan 2010)

She should have choked him out like Jean Chretien did to that other guy. Mind you, the liberal loving MSM would have a feeding frenzy over that.


----------



## vonGarvin (25 Jan 2010)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> In that article it says that the incident was not organized by PETA, but they certainly used it to make one of their moronic statements:


Another article  says this:
PETA, *which took credit for the incident,* said in a release it was part of its campaign to stop the government's "ill-advised sanction of the slaughter of seals." 

Given their tactics of non-lethal violence to instill a mild form of terror to get their "message" across, this makes PETA a band of hypocrites, and I would offer that they seriously be considered a terrorist organisation.  I mean, making statements and organising info campaigns etc is one thing, but assaulting public officials is another.


----------



## The Bread Guy (26 Jan 2010)

This, from the Canadian Press:


> A Liberal MP says he believes the federal government should investigate whether the pieing of Fisheries Minister Gail Shea by a woman opposed to the seal hunt constitutes an act of terrorism.
> 
> Shea was delivering a speech Monday at the Canada Centre for Inland Waters in Burlington, Ont., when a woman stood up and pushed a tofu cream pie squarely into the minister's face.
> 
> ...


----------



## ballz (26 Jan 2010)

Technoviking, I liked you, and I liked what you were saying, until I read that Gerry Byrne agreed with you.

Oh well, I guess even a useless broken clock is right twice a day.


----------



## Fusaki (26 Jan 2010)

> *terrorism* — The calculated use of unlawful violence or threat of unlawful violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or to intimidate governments or societies in the
> pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological.


From the US Govt. JP 1-02 Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms.

Seems to fit the bill...


----------



## vonGarvin (26 Jan 2010)

ballz said:
			
		

> Technoviking, I liked you, and I liked what you were saying, until I read that Gerry Byrne agreed with you.
> 
> Oh well, I guess even a useless broken clock is right twice a day.


:rofl:

Wait a minute, are you saying that I am like a broken clock?  ;D


----------



## vonGarvin (26 Jan 2010)

Here's what our Criminal Code  says, in part, about Terrorism:
an act or omission, in or outside Canada,
(i) that is committed

(A) in whole or in part for a political, religious or *ideological purpose*, objective or cause, and

(B) in whole or in part with the *intention of intimidating the public*, or a segment of the public, with regard to its security, *including its economic security*, or *compelling* a person, *a government * or a domestic or an international organization *to do or to refrain from doing any act*, whether the public or the person, government or organization is inside or outside Canada, and

(ii) that intentionally

(A) causes death or serious bodily harm to a person by the use of violence,

(B) endangers a person’s life,

(C) causes a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or any segment of the public,

(D) causes substantial property damage, whether to public or private property, if causing such damage is likely to result in the conduct or harm referred to in any of clauses (A) to (C), or

(E) causes serious interference with or serious disruption of an essential service, facility or system, whether public or private, other than as a result of advocacy, protest, dissent or stoppage of work that is not intended to result in the conduct or harm referred to in any of clauses (A) to (C),

and includes a conspiracy, attempt or threat to commit any such act or omission, or *being an accessory after the fact * or counselling in relation to any such act or omission, but, for greater certainty, does not include an act or omission that is committed during an armed conflict and that, at the time and in the place of its commission, is in accordance with customary international law or conventional international law applicable to the conflict, or the activities undertaken by military forces of a state in the exercise of their official duties, to the extent that those activities are governed by other rules of international law.
I just bolded some parts that may (or may not) apply in the case of assaulting public officials, with the stated aim of "compelling the government do do an act", which in this case would be to stop the seal hunt.  As I said, PETA or any other group would be more than welcome to protest, send out info campaigns, etc, just as many other groups do; however, assaulting public officials crosses the line, in my opinion, from Freedom of Expression to Intimidation, to wit, Terrorism as defined by law.


----------



## Shec (26 Jan 2010)

Was it a vegan pie?


----------



## The Bread Guy (26 Jan 2010)

What I think would make it hard to prosecute under this bit of the CCC is this (thanks TV):


> that intentionally
> 
> (A) causes *death* or *serious bodily harm* to a person by the use of violence,
> 
> ...



I agree with TV's assessment that assault =/= advocacy/protest, and that from the information I see in the media, a case _could_ be made under the "why"/inent, it would be hard to prove any of these elements I've highlighted in this case.

Still, charge her with just enough to keep her from being able to come to Canada again.


----------



## wannabe SF member (26 Jan 2010)

Shec said:
			
		

> Was it a vegan pie?



It was actually...Tofu.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (26 Jan 2010)

I don't know if the definition fits here, but it sure seems to fit the situation in Caledonia.


----------



## mariomike (26 Jan 2010)

I used to love watching Soupy Sales taking pies in the face when I was a kid. The first political "pieing" that I recall was Anita Bryant. And that was NOT funny.


----------



## ModlrMike (26 Jan 2010)

I agree, charge her with assault and whatever else is appropriate. She should also be declared PNG so as to be denied future entry to Canada. After all, she came here with the express intent to assault a government minister. I also agree with those who think that this may not meet the threshold for terrorism. As much as I would like to see PETA get their comeuppance, the last thing the government needs is more loony leftists crying "fascist, communist, Nazi... Conservatives" and having the MSM spin it out of control. I can see Elizabeth May and her gang leaping to their defence.


----------



## PMedMoe (29 Jan 2010)

Now they have simply GONE TOO FAR!!!!   

*PETA wants Groundhog Day, the robot way*

Roboticists in search of a challenge, take note. The group People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals wants to replace the weather-forecasting Punxsutawney Phil of Groundhog Day fame with an animatronic version. Robot followers that we are here at Crave, we're all for an electronic rodent, but we're also pretty sure groundhog bots have a long way to go before they can charm crowds the way little Phil can. 

PETA maintains that the animal whose annual February 2 antics portend the duration of winter is mistreated--put on display year-round at the local Pennsylvania library; denied the ability to prepare for and enter yearly hibernation; and forced to endure screaming throngs of thousands, media attention, and human handling. 

According to legend, if Punxsutawney Phil sees his shadow, six more weeks of winter weather will follow. If he doesn't, expect an early spring. But PETA has had enough of the tradition that dates back to 1886, and believes robotic technology could be the solution. 

"If Punxsutawney frees Phil, then the bitter winter that's made him into an unwilling media attraction will end, making way for a sunny spring that everyone can enjoy," PETA writes in a post on its PETA Files blog. 

More on link including other links and comments

What a bunch of maroons!!  What a bunch of nincompoops!!

Edit to add:  What PETA doesn't want you to know:

PETA Employees Face 31 Felony Animal-Cruelty Charges

http://petakillsanimals.com/


----------



## The Bread Guy (29 Jan 2010)

You really CAN'T make this stuff up, can you?   :


----------



## FDO (29 Jan 2010)

What next!! Fur lined mitts while protesting the seal hunt? Leather purses while protesting the killing of cows? Will it never end?  

I got to go and have my ham sandwich and milk while I think about this!!


----------



## ModlrMike (30 Jan 2010)

Not real justice, but poetic justice none the less:

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/newfoundland-labrador/story/2010/01/29/nl-seal-pie-012910.html


----------



## ballz (30 Jan 2010)

This has been the talk around town today.

I wish it was done with a seal-flipper pie though haha.

On another note, a guy I know that owns one of the plants around here and buys seals from the fisherman (I think that's how it works anyway) gets a ton of hate mail (baskets every week) from anti-seal hunt people. He ordered a couple thousand custom-made postcards with the recipe for seal-flipper pie on them and told his secretary to screen the hate mail and write one back to everybody that sent them haha. Good times.


----------



## Fusaki (30 Jan 2010)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> Not real justice, but poetic justice none the less:
> 
> http://www.cbc.ca/canada/newfoundland-labrador/story/2010/01/29/nl-seal-pie-012910.html



Now _thats_ comedy! ;D


----------



## frostvelun (30 Jan 2010)

I'm not sure 'creampied' is really the term you are looking for here. Just sayin'


----------



## mariomike (30 Jan 2010)

hahaha I was waiting for someone to say that!

When Anita Bryant was "pied" on TV by gay rights activists, she quipped, "At least it was a fruit pie."
I was amazed her husband didn't punch the SOB out. She prayed for him instead. A very gracious and beautiful woman.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BmJUdLUo8HQ



I must admit, I had never heard of Ms. Shea until this was reported.


----------



## SupersonicMax (30 Jan 2010)

Re: Creampie vs Terrorism.

Don't go too far and don't go into a paranoiac state.  A cream pie is harmless.  At best, it's funny, at worst, you have to wipe your face clean.  It's just a mean to bring up someone's point across and there is no violence involved.  Just like a protest.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (31 Jan 2010)

SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> Re: Creampie vs Terrorism.
> 
> Don't go too far and don't go into a paranoiac state.  A cream pie is harmless.  At best, it's funny, at worst, you have to wipe your face clean.  It's just a mean to bring up someone's point across and there is no violence involved.   Just like a protest.



I don't care how trite you try make it sound, when you invade someone's space without their consent, and lay hands on them, it's violence. No matter how trivial you seem to think it is.


----------



## NL_engineer (31 Jan 2010)

Here is a link from K-ROCK on their part


----------



## eurowing (31 Jan 2010)

SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> Re: Creampie vs Terrorism.
> 
> Don't go too far and don't go into a paranoiac state.  A cream pie is harmless.  At best, it's funny, at worst, you have to wipe your face clean.  It's just a mean to bring up someone's point across and there is no violence involved.  Just like a protest.



I would consider someone doing that to me as a personal attack.  Much like a beer thrown in your face.  It is not harmless, it would precipitate a return punch!


----------



## SupersonicMax (31 Jan 2010)

Then me touching you, so to speak, can be considered violence.  Then I am considered a terrorist for touching you and infinging on your personnal space.  I think people are getting too paranoid about the whole terrorist thing...  If someone treatens to or try to kill other people, I can understand.  If someone smacks a creampie in your face, I wouldn't say it is terrorism...

Tell me, except for the ego, how did it harm the person?

As a side note, I think that by making everything "terrorism" and being overcautious is, by itself, a victory for the real terrorists, the kind that want to change our way of life by killing us.


----------



## eurowing (31 Jan 2010)

I think it all depends on whether the touch is meant to be antagonistic, so a pie delivered to be devoured is distinctly different that one shoved in your face.  I would still consider a pie in the face as an assault.  Your mileage may vary of course.


----------



## OldSolduer (31 Jan 2010)

Before any of us go too far in what is an assault, look up the Criminal Code of Canada. A creampie in the face in which the recipient of said creampie is the victim of an assault, no matter if she/he was harmed or not.
Eons ago, a pat on the rear was accepted social behavior....seriously....it was. Now, the victim can have the police charge the perpetrator with assault.
The creampie is an assault, pure and simple. The perpetrator should be arrested, charged, found guilty and sent packing.


----------



## Fusaki (31 Jan 2010)

SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> Re: Creampie vs Terrorism.
> 
> Don't go too far and don't go into a paranoiac state.  A cream pie is harmless.  At best, it's funny, at worst, you have to wipe your face clean.  It's just a mean to bring up someone's point across and there is no violence involved.  Just like a protest.



According to Technoviking's <a href=http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/91802/post-907290#msg907290>post</a>, where he linked to the definition of terrorism according to the criminal code, you're right and you're wrong.

Putting a creampie in someone's face *is* violence, and I think a case can be made for charging the perpetrator with assault.

But,

That act, while violent, does *not* endanger anyone's life, could not cause serious bodily harm, or pose a serious risk to public health and safety.

So, while creampie attacks cannot be considered terrorism, it is not because they are not violent, but only because they are not violent _enough._


----------



## OldSolduer (31 Jan 2010)

Personally, I think the good Minister should have decked the creampie thower. Her defence for decking said creampie thrower?
Self Defence, pure and simple.

Much the same as Jean Chretien choking out that twirp on Parliament Hill. >


----------



## mariomike (31 Jan 2010)

Big Silverback said:
			
		

> Eons ago, a pat on the rear was accepted social behavior....seriously....it was. Now, the victim can have the police charge the perpetrator with assault.



That is a bygone era, Big Silverback. The "hands-on" approach is now frowned upon. Maybe it always was?
Remember P.M. John Turner's friendly "handshake" of Iona Campagnolo? Politicians are encouraged expected to "press the flesh", but perhaps the P.M. showed a little too much jocular exuberance. Some felt his actions were assinine, others felt he got a bum deal from the press. 
Another high ranking female party organizer remarked, "It can be surprising [as a greeting], but everyone has their style" 
The P.M defended his touchy-feely nature by saying "I'm a very tactile politician."


----------



## mariomike (31 Jan 2010)

Big Silverback said:
			
		

> Much the same as Jean Chretien choking out that twirp on Parliament Hill. >



Is that what they call "a Shawinigan Handshake"?


Edit to add:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shawinigan_Handshake


----------



## Fishbone Jones (31 Jan 2010)

mariomike said:
			
		

> Is that what they call "a Shawinigan Handshake"?



The difference being Bill Clennett never physically accosted ' le p'tit thug de Shawinigan'. In actual fact, it was Cretin that assaulted Clennett.


----------



## OldSolduer (31 Jan 2010)

mariomike said:
			
		

> Is that what they call "a Shawinigan Handshake"?



Why yes I do beleive it is!!

By the same token, the PETA activist who was pied by a pro seal hunt activist should have been arrested and charged as well.


----------



## OldSolduer (31 Jan 2010)

The Criminal Code states:

1) Every one who is unlawfully assaulted without having provoked the assault is justified in repelling force by force if the force he uses is not intended to cause death or grievous bodily harm and is no more than is necessary to enable him to defend himself.

1) Every one is justified in using force to defend himself or any one under his protection from assault, if he uses no more force than is necessary to prevent the assault or the repetition of it.

IMO Jean Chretien was justified in using force. This twirp was threatening, so Jean took matters into his own hand.....pun intended!

The Minister would have been justified in using no more force than necessary to defend herself. A good punch in the nose would have sufficed.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (31 Jan 2010)

Big Silverback said:
			
		

> IMO Jean Chretien was justified in using force. This twirp was threatening, so Jean took matters into his own hand.....pun intended!



I'm not going to get into a pissing contest over Cretin, but suffice to say, I don't agree he was threatened in any way. Well, maybe his massive ego, but that doesn't count in the big scheme of things.


----------



## ballz (31 Jan 2010)

Big Silverback said:
			
		

> Why yes I do beleive it is!!
> 
> By the same token, the PETA activist who was pied by a pro seal hunt activist should have been arrested and charged as well.



errr... why?

If the PETA activist that pied the minister should be charged for assault, shouldn't the pro-seal hunt activist be charged for assault too?


----------



## OldSolduer (31 Jan 2010)

ballz said:
			
		

> errr... why?
> 
> If the PETA activist that pied the minister should be charged for assault, shouldn't the pro-seal hunt activist be charged for assault too?


 
Sorry that's what I meant. My brain is on Master Yoda setting....


----------



## ballz (31 Jan 2010)

Big Silverback said:
			
		

> Sorry that's what I meant. My brain is on Master Yoda setting....



Hahahaha *insert a "you are old" joke here* S'all good, I kinda figured but I had to make sure.


----------



## GAP (25 Feb 2012)

PETA not as humane as you might think
February 25th, 2012
Article Link

Arguably, the most people know about PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) is that its members occasionally parade in the nude (or near nude) on the theme "we'd rather go naked than wear furs."

It's especially newsworthy when the likes of Pamela Anderson and Kim Basinger participate. PETA justifies nudity on the basis of "advertising through the media;" nude activists for animals "consistently grab headlines."

Founded in 1980, PETA has done stellar work in curbing cruel and often useless torturous experiment on animals of all sorts - as reflected in a summary of its mission statement: "Animals are not ours to eat, wear, experiment on, or use for entertainment."

As such it opposes circuses, zoos, farms, pet stores and the like.

PETA advertises itself as the largest animal rights organization in the world, with more than three million members and supporters. PETA stages "rescue" operations of abused animals and can serve a useful purpose, which it is exceeding adept at publicizing.

What PETA does not tell you is that it doesn't much like pets - which it sees to view as a form of animal slavery. Nor does it tell you that it euthanizes - kills - some 85% of the animals it rescues. As an organization, it tends to believe an animal is better dead than living with a human being.

As far back as 2008, the Center for Consumer Freedom petitioned Virginia's Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (VDACS) to have PETA officially reclassified as a "slaughterhouse."

It claimed PETA's own official reports, indicate it put to death virtually every dog and cat it took in for adoption. This policy extended from 2006 through 2011.

Virginia requires animal shelters to report the number of dogs and cats taken in each year - how many are euthanized and how many are adopted.

These statistics are available through Virginia's Sunshine Law and, as incredible as some may find it, since 1998, of 31,815 animals (mostly dogs and cats) admitted to PETA shelters, only 3,159 were adopted - and 27,751 were killed.
  
More on link


----------



## fraserdw (25 Feb 2012)

I was shocked by this, as the maid and butler of 3 cats I cannot imagine life without them.


----------



## cupper (25 Feb 2012)

They probably support Mitt Romney too!


----------



## jollyjacktar (26 Feb 2012)

Well that's a dirty little secret I'm sure they don't like hitting the light of day.  Another reason to hate them.


----------



## cupper (27 Feb 2012)

Not sure if you got the same commercials during the Oscars north of the border, but there was one that just aired here that calls out the Humane Society of the US.

It was put together by a group called Humane Watch.

http://humanewatch.org/

I know that the HSUS runs ads here regularly, and some of the images I have questioned. Particularly when they call into question the treatment of downer cattle.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (4 Dec 2014)

I hate these clowns.......


http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/12/04/peta_plans_billboard_ad_based_on_corpse_left_in_hamilton_home.html


By: The Canadian Press  The Canadian Press,  Published on Thu Dec 04 2014 

HAMILTON—An animal rights group known for some controversial ad campaigns is proposing a new billboard in Hamilton based on the case of a woman who kept her husband’s corpse in a bedroom for six months.
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) said Thursday it was negotiating with Hamilton-area advertisers to try to place a billboard that proclaims, “Are There Corpses in Your Home? Time to Go Vegan.”

Earlier this week, a devoutly religious Hamilton woman pleaded guilty to failing to notify authorities that her husband had died from an illness he was not getting treatment for.
Kaling Wald, who said she and her family were praying daily for her husband’s resurrection, received a suspended sentence and 18 months probation with counselling.

“If you have chicken breasts, steaks, or bologna in your refrigerator, we have news for you: you’re sharing your home with corpses,” PETA’s president said in a release.
Ingrid Newkirk added that people who are horrified by that should “try going vegan.”

A spokesman for the City of Hamilton said there was nothing officials could do to prevent the ad from being put up.
“Our sign bylaw does regulate the size and location of billboards but not the content,” said Michael Kirkopoulos.

He added that the city would probably get involved if the contents fall under the harassment umbrella, racism or anything deemed to be inappropriate from a legal perspective.
“Based on what it looks like the message will be on these billboards, the city has no ability at this point in time to prohibit that type of billboard.”
Daniel Carron, an outreach co-ordinator for PETA based in Norfolk, Va., agreed the billboard was meant to shock.

“The billboard is thought-provoking and we hope it is going to encourage people who are shocked by this to think about whether or not they’re storing dead bodies in their own freezers and in their own homes.”


----------



## The Bread Guy (5 Dec 2014)

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> I hate these clowns.......
> 
> 
> http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/12/04/peta_plans_billboard_ad_based_on_corpse_left_in_hamilton_home.html
> ...


I really wish this was satire .....


----------



## ModlrMike (5 Dec 2014)

They have now successfully put themselves on the same level as Westboro. 

At times like these I'm reminded of what Churchill had to say:

"A zealot is someone who won't change his mind, and can't change the subject."


----------



## cupper (24 Feb 2015)

PETA may be going down in defeat here in Virginia. 

(Interesting stat comparisons between county shelters in VA and PETA's euthanasia rates)

*Animal bill could put PETA out of the shelter business*

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-politics/animal-bill-could-put-peta-out-of-the-shelter-business/2015/02/23/2f4f05b6-bb6a-11e4-b274-e5209a3bc9a9_story.html?tid=hpModule_ba0d4c2a-86a2-11e2-9d71-f0feafdd1394&hpid=z11



> RICHMOND — Nothing is warm and fuzzy in the world of Virginia animal-welfare organizations this year as shelters attack each other over a seemingly slight tweak to the state code that some activists say could put a major shelter out of business.
> 
> At the heart of this fight is People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals and its record on euthanasia, which alarms other animal advocates.
> 
> ...


----------

