Tuesday February 3, 2009, 4:28 pm
If those figures are accurate, that is a criminally offensive euthanasia rate. No shelter worth its name would fail to adopt less than 10% of its population.

Tuesday February 3, 2009, 4:54 pm
Sorry, this is NOT true. "Petakillsanimals" is a front for several groups who use, abuse and kill animals for greed...PETA is a threat to them. Please email PETA and ask them about this 'group'; you will receive a list of the organizations behind this site.

Tuesday February 3, 2009, 4:59 pm
That may be what PETA wants people to believe Laura..and of course they deny much of the wrongs they do..but that is not the truth..Far from it..
They are hypocrites in more ways than one..

Tuesday February 3, 2009, 5:04 pm
PETA is no more a threat than Alf or any of the other extreme organizations..As a matter of fact these people really do more harm than good for animals..

Tuesday February 3, 2009, 5:14 pm
I agree after reading the Article!
How sad!!!

:
(

Tuesday February 3, 2009, 6:47 pm
How About Goverments for the Ethical Treatment of PETA.
if Animals Deserve Equall Rights/Protections; Then People That Make Those Claims should Be held To Thier Own Higher Standard. Killers Treated To the Same Justice as Murderers..Of Course We Should Not Support the Goverments Killing of Any Humans.. Therefore They Could Attempt To Identify which Members Were Merely Ignorant Dupes and Give them an Education in Resisting Brainwashing and Other Cult Practices; While Allowing Them To Do Comunity Service in NO KILL Shelters..
Incarcerate the Ones, Who Profit From These Murderous Hipocritical Actions; as thier Greed and Killing of Those Weaker than them makes it unsafe for Both Human and Animal Alike (Remember the Statistics on Those Who Kill or Torture animals Turning To Humans as thier Victims eventually);
if those Persons Determine that it is indeed Crueler to Be Permentantly Incarcerated After Some Years in General Population They Should Be given thier Voluntary Choice of Which Means of Uthanasia They Prefer to Selfadminister....
Yes That Sounds Sick Twisted and Overreachingly Absurd; So Does PETA's Reign of Murder and Exploitation of Animals; To Promote thier Anti Human; Animal Killing agenda's.....

Tuesday February 3, 2009, 8:23 pm
It's not just PETA that is hypocritical, sadly. The whole "animal rights" movement is rotten to the core and basically anti-human.

The writer of the blog entry below, Abbie Smith aka ERV, is the owner of a pit bull, the very sort of dog that is the most vilified in the media. And yet she condemns PETA.

http://scienceblogs.com/erv/2008/04/erv_vs_the_humane_society.php

Category: PUPPY!
Posted on: April 30, 2008 9:14 AM, by ERV
Its no secret I hate PETA.

They want to kill my best friend.

So I wasnt surprised that in a recent article highlighting the issue of animal shelter euthanasia, PETA was there to dance on about how they are for shelter euthanasia, but but against using dogs for life saving research, but against the KKK, but for killing dogs based on their breed (Arnie is a Jew dog! Yay!), blah blah whatever. Theyre idiots.

What I was surprised to read was The Humane Society another fringe group like PETA, the 'Humane Society of the United States' backing up PETAs idiotic stance:

"No-kill is a noble goal," says Wayne Pacelle, president and CEO of the Humane Society of the United States. "But the sheer number of animals make it almost unachievable."

Well, okay, maybe. But city after city is trying to go 'no kill', and local private shelters seem to be doing as best they can on the budgets they have...

Shelters in Virginia, New York and San Francisco report successes similar to Nevada's, and communities in more than a dozen states have announced no-kill goals and added legislative mandates to their agenda. King County, Wash., passed a law requiring area shelters to achieve an 85 percent save rate by 2009. San Antonio, Texas, is aiming for zero kills by 2012. And Ivan City, Utah, saved 97 percent of its shelter animals beginning in 2006 when the animal control ordinances were rewritten to prohibit the euthanasia of healthy animals.
...
But Brown and others insist they have achieved no-kill without turning animals away, and on a fraction of PETA's $30 million budget. "With the resources at their disposal, PETA and the Humane Society of the U.S. could become no-kill in no time," Winograd says.

Oklahoma City is trying to be 'no kill' by 2010 (hopefully they will do so, as a graduation present for me ). And 'no kill' seems like it would improve volunteer numbers and donations-- I cant go to the OKC shelter to make donations of towels and rawhides and such. I physically cant. I cant hear those dogs bark... Im tearing up typing this... So I have a campus friends take them in for me.



But man, 'no kill' shelters are a happier place! You can volunteer to play with Fido and Dozer without worrying they will be killed, all alone, on your day off. Sure you might get attached and they get adopted on your day off, but YAY!

Luckily, I dont think I officially have to go to war with The Humane Society-- according to the article, there are local chapters that are going 'no kill' on their own. But it will make me more careful about my donations.

Edited to add-- I got duped. See Wes for more on how to spot a fake humane society.

Monday March 30, 2009, 11:47 am
please. Dee C. you dont think the government and agriculture companies deny much of the wroongs they do? work on your research then comment thanks. I honestly dont think anyone will know the truth which sucks! its sad how corrupt and hidden everything is today.

Monday March 30, 2009, 11:51 am
AND DALE? whattt would honestly be the point of being a hypocrite? like where does that get them? really? people VOLUNTEER to help animals so its not even like some of them get paid for it. Being a hypocrite wouldnt be worth it.