----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob Orabona" <ad...@friendsofanimals.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 2:44 PM
Subject: Why is PETA suing animal rights organizations?

Not one penny of Friends of Animals' salaries or its donors' money goes to
or is in support of the killing of animals.  Newkirk is overpaid even
without considering what hidden perks she may be getting from Peta.
Unfortunately - Catch 22, the less money Peta gives her, the more money Peta
has to spend on killing animals and suing sanctuaries.  Peta should either
give her a huge raise or fire her.  FoA does not raise money in support of
animal rights and then use that money to kill animals.

If FoA incurs a deficit from time to time, it's either because it is
spending money it doesn't have on animals that need help now, or its
spending money on lawyers (currently) to protect Primarily Primates from
legal attacks by Peta.  See:

http://www.examiner.com/x-4198-Omaha-Vegan-Examiner~y2009m3d30-Why-is...

Bob Orabona
Operations Director
Friends of Animals

==========================================

----- Original Message -----
From: "Priscilla Feral" <fe...@friendsofanimals.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 5:15 PM
Subject: PETA and institutional killing (killing is the accurate and
appropriate word)

Some have asked for a few links to show evidence of PETA's killing of
animals. There are many, and they now span decades. PETA once made an
attempt to run a sanctuary and promised permanent homes to rescued animals
at the site; but -- in the year 1991 -- it turned from a refugee camp into a
death site. See the Washington Post at
http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-1059451.html on the killing of their 18
rabbits and 14 birds. PETA's budget for that year was more than 6 million
USD annually, yet somehow they saw fit to dispose of 18 rabbits and 14 birds
from a place they were calling a sanctuary.

Nathan Winograd, lawyer who's written a book on the killing by animal
advocates (Redemption) presents sourced facts applicable to the current day.

But anyone can do the research. It's all in the public sphere.

The numbers regarding Virginia, PETA's home state, are on file and made
public by the Commonwealth of Virginia. See the record (source is the
Virginia Office of the State Veterinarian) the statistics for any animals
who aren't reclaimed by the owners:
http://www.virginia.gov/vdacs_ar/cgi-bin/Vdacs_search.cgi?link_select....
(If link is broken, try http://tinyurl.com/2tlk6l )

So last year (with a budget of more than 30 million USD annually) they
homed only seven animals out of the 2,216 they took in. Again, it's vital to
note that this is not a claim or an allegation. It's a fact, issued in
public records.

It is no secret that PETA kills animals systematically and even goes
seeking out animals to dispatch; it's an institutional policy. One can apply
for a job right now, through PETA's Human Resources Department, in which
they will train you in killing the animals. The job title is Community
Animal Project (CAP) Coordinator. You need no degree to apply. Job
description states: "Certification in animal euthanasia and drug use
(training will be provided by PETA)." Again, it's not a secret; it's on
PETA's website.

It's not just going on in Virginia, but in other places as well.

On June 15, 2005, police officers arrested two PETA employees for dumping
the bodies of animals they'd killed in a bin at a Piggly Wiggly Supermarket
in Ahoskie, North Carolina. At least eighty dead animals were pulled from
the site.  A mother cat with dead kittens were amongst the bodies; they had
been deemed adoptable by veterinarian Patrick Proctor and were released with
assurances from the PETA staffers that homes would be found. Newkirk and
domestic animal rescue chief Daphna Nachminovitch gave the media and
concerned animal advocates several formal comments during the next several
days, stating that dumping the dead animals in bins violated PETA policy --
that is, the method of disposing the bodies hadn't been condoned -- but
insisted that PETA had never concealed that most of the animals it took from
the North Carolina shelters would be killed.

Newkirk and Nachminovitch claimed that PETA killed North Carolina animals
by lethal injection so that they would not be drowned in floods, shot, or
gassed.

(Reportedly, employees are normally supposed to bring dead animals to a
walk-in freezer at PETA's headquarters. The organization has a contract with
a crematorium, as Raleigh's News & Observer reported during the coverage of
this case.)

It's good the PETA people are not advocates for human refugees, but why
should the animals' movement matter so little that the above goes by with
advocates continuing to work with them and laud the experiences? This needs
to be re-thought, and urgently.

Friends of Animals

=============================================

----- Original Message -----
From: "Joe Miele" <jmmi...@comcast.net>
Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 8:49 PM

The following comments are mine alone and they do not represent the views of
any organization to which I belong or represent.

Rather than turning this issue into a question of which organization is on
better financial footing or which of its officers earn more, let's bring it
back to the animals - where discussions comparing two or more organizations
should begin and end.

I have problems with the philosophy espoused by Friends of Animals regarding
their vehement condemnation of militant direct action - the same kinds of
actions that have saved the lives of hundreds of thousands, if not millions
of animals since Ronnie Lee founded the Band of Mercy.  Further, I believe
FoA's sympathizing with animal abusers over animal liberators will do more
harm than it could ever do good.

That said, I have not heard accusations levied against FoA claiming that the
organization kills healthy, adoptable animals by the thousands as PeTA has
done and continues to do.  This conduct in inexcusable and absolutely
negates any amount of good the organization does.

Following is a list of the anti-animal work that PeTA has been and/or
continues to be a part of.  None of this has to my knowledge been supported
by FoA or any other organization that claims to be "animal rights" -
something PeTA is light years from being.  Feel free to e-mail me privately
for sources.  Yes, I can document everything on this list.

PeTA:

Supports killing "any 'pit bull' who comes through the front door (of a
shelter)."

Encouraged no-kill shelters to become kill shelters.

Suggested to a vivisector that he bleed mice from their tails as part of an
experiment.

Asked for the NRA's help to train Canadian seal killers to use rifles to
kill seals.

Actively kills feral cats whether or not they are ill.

Suggested that the Virginia Parks Service use box traps and euthanasia (sic)
to kill healthy raccoons.

Offered to kill turkeys living in a Hampton, VA community.

Suggested that shooting and killing beavers is an acceptable way to deal
with the animals.

Gave an award to a person who invented a trap that gasses mice to death.

Killed its own animals living at its' Aspin Hill "sanctuary."

Why any animal advocate - be they a vegan liberationist or a meat-eating
welfarist - would support PeTA after learning of these facts speaks to the
mentality of those in this movement who are content to travel through life
without ever spending two seconds of critical thought on what these people
and organizations are really doing.

While FoA may cling to the naive notion that the war against animal
exploitation can be won solely through vegan activism, and while it may pay
its officers higher salaries than PeTA does, they are not killers.  In
contrast, there is not enough soap in the world to wash the blood off PeTA's
violent hands.

You know I'm right,

Joe Miele

==========================================

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Shishkoff" <d...@earthfuture.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 10:35 PM

I thought it would be worthwhile to comment on the letter from Nancy
(vill...@hamptons.com), which is at the peak of intellect, wit and
thoughtful progression of the AR movement as any i've ever seen from her.

Her latest contribution to the movement proclaimed:

"Three years ago, your blatant hypocrisy destroyed the value that ar-news
once enjoyed."

It's interesting to note a piece of relevant info -- specifically that it
was three years ago that she was banned from posting due to inappropriate
outbursts. (If you could imagine her doing such a thing!)

Or better said: the 'value' that AR-News 'once enjoyed' was Nancy herself.

Um..  I don't think there's anything more to say.  =)

- Dave Shishkoff