Tag Archives: Ingrid Newkirk

Newkirk: We Oppose All Violence Against Civilians, But Fashion Designers Are Fair Game

Posted on by
Reply

Ingrid Newkirk, of all people, gave a speech at a conference addressing violent conflict in the Middle East at which she said,

. . . we call all attacks on civilians, whether against Palestinians in Jenin or Israelis in Tel Aviv, what they are: War crimes.

If we want an end to violence, it means that we must first reject the slaughterhouse, the animal circus, and animal skins and remember that kindness to animals has been a cornerstone of every great religion in the history of the world.

Mohandas Gandhi, one of the icons of the nonviolence movement, taught that how we treat animals shows our ability to empathize with those who are ‘different’ from us, which is the first step toward living in peace with our human neighbors.

Leaving aside the accuracy of her claim about religion and animals, it is interesting that Newkirk declares violence against civilians “war crimes”, but as far as I know neither Newkirk or People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals has ever apologized for Dan Mathews remarks in admiration of serial killer Andrew Cunanan. Cunanan murdered fashion designer Gianni Versace, and in 1999 PETA’s Mathews, asked to name a 20th century man he loves, replied,

Andrew Cunanan, because he got Versace to stop doing fur.

Source:

Animal rights group addresses Mideast conflict. Ynetnews.Com, January 4, 2005.

PETA Launches Campaign Comparing Animal Use to Slavery

Posted on by
Reply

Since it was so successful with its “Holocaust On Your Plate” campaign, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals has followed that up with a traveling exhibit called “Are Animals the New Slaves?”

Note the oddity of the title — new slaves? Domestication of animals is believed to be about 12,000 years old. There’s nothing new about it — in fact, since animal domestication far predates any historical slavery, the exhibit would have been better called “Were Slaves the New Animals?”
Anyway, PETA special projects director Dawn Carr told WTOC-TV that,

The very same mindset in the mind today when we have animals in circuses, animals in factory farms that are beaten, branded, chained. These animals treasure their lives and want to live every bit as much as you or I do.

You can almost imagine some 19th century animal rights activist being asked if he could free a slave or a chicken which one he’d do, and having the activist reply that he’d free the chicken. Presumably, to Ingrid Newkirk, a rat is a pig is a dog is a slave.

Source:

Animal rights group showcases exhibit. Liz Flynn, WTOC TV, August 4, 2005.

Newkirk: Sometimes You Have to Carry a Big Stick

Posted on by
Reply

In an interview with the Shanghai Star, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals’ Ingrid Newkirk described her group’s outrageous campaigns and tactics, saying,

Sometimes sadly, you have to look quite scary and carry a big stick.

Of course we’ve seen just how scary looking PETA activists can be, and the “big stick” line is the best explanation yet of that Earth Liberation Front donation.

Source:

Fighters for animal welfare. Shanghai Star, July 21, 2005.

Washington State Sen. Wants Bestiality Ban — Don't Tell Ingrid!

Posted on by
Reply

After a man died on July 2 after having sex with a horse at a farm near Enumclaw, Washington, state Sen. Pam Roach introduced a bill that would make bestiality a Class C felony in that state, punishable by up to five years in jail and a $100,000 fine.

Did Roach run this by everyone’s favorite animal rights crusader Ingrid Newkirk? After all, Newkirk’s on record as saying there’s nothing inherently abusive about bestiality,

If a girl gets sexual pleasure from riding a horse, does the horse suffer? If not, who cares? If you French kiss your dog and he or she thinks it’s great, is it wrong? We believe all exploitation and abuse is wrong. If it isn’t exploitation and abuse, it may not be wrong.

So far there’s no evidence that the horse suffered in the Enumclaw incident. It might just meet Newkirk’s criteria for being non-abusive (at least for the horse).

The odd thing is that, according to the Associated Press, bestiality is explicitly illegal in only 30 states. In the Enumclaw case, local police knew of the farm’s reputation for offering animals for sex, but had no authority to do anything about it (besides, they didn’t want to piss off Newkirk).

Given the almost universal revulsion at bestiality, its odd explicit bans aren’t routinely in place as part of other sex crimes packages.

Source:

Roach seeks law against bestiality. Associated Press, July 19, 2005.

Missouri Representative Again Introduces Proposed Ban on Photographing Animal Enterprises, Knowingly Introducing Diseases

Posted on by
Reply

In March, Missouri State Representative Jim Guest for the third year in a row introduced a bill in that state’s legislature that would make it illegal to take unauthorized photographs of some animal enterprises.

The bill would modify a section of Missouri law making it illegal to,

Without the express written consent of the animal facility, photograph, videotape, or otherwise obtain images from a location within the animal facility that is not legally accessible to the public;

[And/or]Intentionally or knowingly release or introduce any pathogen or disease in or near an animal facility that has the potential to cause disease in any animal at the animal facility or that otherwise threatens human health or biosecurity at the animal facility.

The second provision, on the intentional release of pathogens, is a concern that animal rights activists from People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals helped create when both Bruce Friedrich and Ingrid Newkirk made public statements in 2001 hoping that Great Britain’s foot-and-mouth epidemic would afflict farm animals in the United States as well.

Newkirk said at the time, that,

I openly hope that it [foot and mouth disease] comes here. It will bring economic harm only for those who profit from giving people heart attacks and giving animals a concentration camp-like existence.

While Friedrich wrote in a letter a few weeks later that,

I suppose if it happens [an outbreak of foot-and-mouth in the United States], we’ll write a massive thank you note because it’ll turn a massive amount of people into vegetarians

Though why people would turn to vegetarianism over a disease that, except in very rare instance, effects only non-humans and even then simply causes a mild illness is a mystery (the problem the disease causes is almost exclusively economic for farmers, and is endemic in much of the world without any adverse health risks to human beings other than slightly higher costs for meat).

But why the ban on photography? Guest says it is needed to secure Missouri farms and breeders from animal rights extremists and potential bioterrorists. He told the St. Louis Dispatch,

We’ve been fortunate that we have not had a threat to our food security. We have the safest food supply in the world, and the intent of this legislation is to strengthen those statutes we have and protect that.

Meanwhile, Brenda Kemp, president of the Missouri Pet Breeders Association, said the bill would help deter trespassing on farms and other animal enterprises,

You have no idea where they’ve been or what they’re tracking in. With a kennel you have to be extremely careful with who you let on your property because you can bring in disease so easily.

Frankly, I think the ban on photography makes little sense when what seems to really be needed is simply a strengthening — and perhaps more enforcement effort — of existing trespassing laws. A ban on photographing animal enterprises from publicly accessible areas is simply a bad idea. A better idea is larger fines and other remedies targeted at people who trespass on private property to take pictures that are not obtainable from publicly accessible areas.

The full text of HB 666 can be read here.

Source:

Animal protection groups blast farm photograph bill. Jacob Luecke, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, March 29, 2005.

PETA Once Again Targets Children

Posted on by
Reply

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals’ policy about targeting children with its materials is about as consistent and accurate as anything else the group does — its policy appears to be to tell reporters and others what PETA thinks the reporter wants to hear at the time.

So, Ingrid Newkirk went on Crossfire in 2002 and told Tucker Carlson that PETA doesn’t target children saying that “everything we do is based at adults.” That was a transparent lie, and PETA hacks have lately taken to refining it a bit with PETA’s Ray Hinkle saying earlier this year that, “[PETA] never hands out things to children under the age of 13 without parents’ permission.”

That, of course, is also a transparent lie, since PETA has been sending activists to hand out materials to children near middle schools in the United States, where many of the children are under the age of 13. How do they verify age or obtain parental consent?

Now, PETA is apparently doing this internationally — in March it angered officials at a South African primary school when PETA activists showed up to hand out anti-chicken propaganda.

According to a report in the Cape Times, PETA activists showed up near Golden Grove Primary school in Rondebosch and handed out posters and trading cards putting forth PETA’s case against teaching chicken. Now in South Africa, a primary school usually consists of grades 1-6, so the vast majority of students at Golden Grove Primary are under the age of 13.

James Bailey, principal of the Golden Grove Primary school, told The Cape Times,

We are not taking sides on the chicken issue, but we at least wanted to be notified. They are targeting small, impressionable children and the wording on the cards is very emotive and aggressive.

It seriously undermines the school’s ongoing efforts to educate children not to take things from, or trust strangers. Children can become very susceptible to influence from strangers who want to sell them drugs or hurt them.

Oddly enough, PETA’s Andrew Butler breaks with Newkirk and Hinkle in admitting the truth — that PETA actively targets children, and that the organization considers this to be legitimate (emphasis added),

Chicken is the most consumed meat in South Africa and conglomerates only care about how much money they make. People are not made aware of the appalling conditions at chicken factories. We think children should get the chance to make an informed and compassionate decision about what they eat.

And here I thought it was parent’s responsibility to make decisions about what their children eat.

Source:

Activists ruffle feathers with campaign. Karen Breytenbach, Cape Times, March 16, 2005.

Education in South Africa. Philippa Garson, Undated.

PETA and Bestiality, Round 2

Posted on by
1

In March, one Harold Hart, 63, of Neillsville, Wisconsin was arrested for allegedly had committed sexual acts with cows at a Greenwood, Wisconsin farm more than fifty times since 2004. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, of course, was all over this, but their reaction was a bit odd given Ingrid Newkirk’s previous claims about bestiality.

PETA’s Daniel Paden sent a letter to Clark County District Attorney Darwin Zwieg urging Zwieg to order psychological testing for Hart and waxed on about how people who have sex with animals are also supposedly more likely to engage in other criminal behaviors,

A recent study by Jory, Flemming, and Burton shows that 96 percent of offenders who had engaged in bestiality also admitted to sexual assaults on humans. When asked how many serial killers had a history of abusing animals, FBI supervisory special agent Alan Brantley, a psychologist who was formerly on staff at a maximum security prison, said, “The real question is, ‘How many do not?Â’” Experts agree that it is the severity of the behavior, not the species of the victim, that matters.

PETA’s Martin Mesereau also maintained there was a link between bestiality and other sex crimes, saying in a press release,

Studies show that offenders who commit bestiality often go on to commit sex crimes against humans. The community should follow this case closely because anyone capable of this kind of cruelty poses a definitive risk, not just to animals, but to fellow human beings.

If people who have sex with animals are so much more likely to engage in other criminal sexual acts, why was Ingrid Newkirk so nonchalant about it when defending Peter Singer’s claims about bestiality?

Singer, you might remember, was roundly criticized by most animal rights activists and groups for saying the following in a book review,

The potential violence of the orangutan’s come-on may have been disturbing, but the fact that it was an orangutan making the advances was not. That may be because [Birute] Galdikas understands very well that we are animals, indeed more specifically, we are great apes. This does not make sex across the species barrier normal, or natural, whatever those much-misused words may mean, but it does imply that it ceases to be an offence to our status and dignity as human beings.

The only prominent activist who came to Singer’s defense was Ingrid Newkirk, who said of bestiality,

If a girl gets sexual pleasure from riding a horse, does the horse suffer? If not, who cares? If you French kiss your dog and he or she thinks it’s great, is it wrong? We believe all exploitation and abuse is wrong. If it isn’t exploitation and abuse, it may not be wrong.

Following Newkirk’s claims, shouldn’t investigators first establish whether or not the sex between Hart and the bovines was consensual and or not? Certainly the fact that he apparently tied the cows up first might initially lead one to conclude that it was not, but perhaps the cows on this particular farm have some sort of bondage fetish. Either way, at a minimum — using Newkirk’s benchmark — bestiality may not even be wrong, much less lead people to commit sex crimes against humans.

Perhaps Hart’s defense should claim that he was merely taking noted animal advocate Ingrid Newkirk’s advice. No, wait a minute . . . if a judge learns Hart takes Newkirk seriously, that would be proof positive that he’s nuts.

Sources:

PETA pressures DA in cow-sex case. Marshfield News-Herald, March 9, 2005.

Peta Demands Jail Time, Psychiatric Intervention If Alleged Neillsville Animal Rapist Is Convicted. Press Release, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, March 8, 2005.

Australian Minister Accuses PETA of Involvement with Terrorist Groups

Posted on by
1

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals recently threatened to sue Australia’s Agricultural Minister Warren Truss after Truss accused the animal rights group of providing aid and comfort to animal and environmental terrorists.

Truss apparently cited testimony by the Center for Consumer Freedom about PETA’s alleged involvement with the Animal Liberation Front and Earth Liberation Front. CCF reprinted part of Truss speech which said,

But even more concerning, it has been alleged in a US Senate hearing by the same organization that PETA has provided aid and comfort to people associated with two groups considered domestic terrorist threats by the FBI — the Earth Liberation Front (ELF) and the Animal Liberation Front (ALF).

According to the FBI, the two groups have been responsible for more than 600 crimes since 1996, causing more than $43 million in damage. The ALF even brags on its website that the two groups committed “100 illegal direct actions” — like blowing up four-wheel-drives, destroying the brakes on seafood delivery trucks, and planting firebombs in restaurants — in 2002 alone.

PETA lawyer Jeff Kerr threatened to sue Truss calling the claims part of a smear campaign by a “discredited group.”

If the statements are untrue and part of a smear campaign, then why hasn’t PETA sued the Center for Consumer Freedom for making the same statements for several years now? Perhaps PETA doesn’t think it would help to go into court only to have CCF show PETA’s own 2001 tax return showing a $15,000 donation to the Earth Liberation Front. Or maybe it doesn’t want to be reminded of Ingrid Newkirk’s odd behavior in the Rodney Coronado case which was cited in the government’s sentencing memo (emphasis added),

Forensic evidence discovered during the investigation confirmed that Coronado played an important role in planning and executing the ALF’s campaign of terrorism. Investigators learned that immediately before and after the MSU arson, a Federal Express package had been sent to a Bethesda, Maryland address from an individual identifying himself as “Leonard Robideau”. The first package went to Ingrid Newkirk, PETA’s founder.

. . .

Significantly, Newkirk had arranged to have the package delivered to her days before the MSU arson occurred.

Not to mention quotes from everyone from Bruce Freidrich to Dan Mathews to Newkirk herself expressing approval for actual acts of violence and destruction and anticipation that more such acts might be forthcoming.

I suspect that this lawsuit will have the same sort of longevity as PETA’s lawsuit against New Jersey over another PETA attorney’s violent altercation with a deer.

Source:

PETA may sue over Truss’ terror comments. Australian Associated Press, March 3, 2005.

Not A G’Day For PETA Down Under. Press Release, Center for Consumer Freedom, March 4, 2005.

Ingrid Newkirk On the Evils of Procreation

Posted on by
Reply

Ingrid Newkirk is making the rounds with a new book, “Making Kind Choices” — no word on whether or not firebombing research laboratories heads the list of kind choices. But Newkirk is traveling the country promoting the book and giving interviews, some of which reveal more about her extremist views.

First, as usual, Newkirk is less than truthful in her interview in this exchange with OnlineMilwaukee.Com (emphasis added),

OMC: Is it true you said you want to dance on Col. Sanders’ grave?

Newkirk (laughing): No, that I never said. But KFC, unlike McDonald’s, Wendy’s and Burger King, refuses to make any reforms in their treatment of chickens. I ask people not to stop the car for KFC. . .

But the truth is that Newkirk did, in fact, suggests dancing on Col. Sanders grave. That anecdote comes from a New Yorker profile of PETA by Michael Specter in which Specter writes of attending a brainstorming session with Newkirk and other PETA employees (emphasis added),

The group devoted the biggest block of time to its most important current action: the campaign against KFC. According to the company’s Web site, last year the chain served seven hundred and thirty-six million chickens. If the chickens served in its restaurants in 2002 were laid head to claw, they would circle the equator more than eight times. Somebody suggested making Colonel Sanders action figures, or having people go to Louisville basketball games dressed only in a bucket. Another person said that perhaps they ought to commit civil disobedience at KFC restaurants; getting arrested is always good for the cause. Newkirk quickly rejected that idea. “No,” she said. “Once you start, you have to continue, and I don’t think we have the resources or the support yet.” Everyone agreed that they had to attack the image of the Colonel. “He is loved in Louisville, and he is buried there,” someone said. Newkirk’s eyes lit up. “Why not find out when his birthday is, call the newspapers, and go dance on his grave?” she said.

Asked by OnlineMilwaukee.Com if she really plans to donate her body parts after her death, Newkirk replied,

Yes. I plan to send my liver somewhere in France to protest foie gras (liver pate). California recently banned this food and England and Germany banned it as well. I really think France needs to ban it.

OMC: What else?

Newkirk: I am going to donate my pointer finger to Ringling Brothers. Not the (swear) finger, I’m not that rude, but the pointer finger is a way to say “shame on you.” They have mistreated so many animals over the years, and recently killed three baby elephants that were too young to be weaned from their mother.

I plan to have handbags made from my skin . . . and an umbrella stand made from my seat. I grew up in India and it’s common for an elephants foot to be cut off and made into an umbrella stand. My feet are too small to make a proper umbrella stand, but my seat . . .

Newkirk also reiterates her view that having children is a very selfish thing to do,

OMC: I read that you think having a baby is like adopting a pure-bred animal — totally selfish.

Newkirk: Yes, that’s true. I wish more people would adopt children. If I had more time, I would. There are so many beautiful children in Eastern Europe — all over the world — that need to get out of orphanages and into families.

Well, I think we can all be glad that Newkirk did not selfishly decide to reproduce or adopt.

Source:

PETA president promotes new pub. Molly Snyder Edler, February 1, 2005.

PETA Targets Children — And Lies Again

Posted on by
Reply

Despite Ingrid Newkirk’s assertions that People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals does not target children, the animal rights group recently launched a campaign — “Chickens are Friends, Not Food” — aimed at elementary school-aged children.

According to the Associated Press, PETA’s vegan campaign coordinator Matt Rice sent letters to 120 principles of schools across the South wanting to show a PETA produced film, “The Secret Lives of Chickens” and hand out PETA trading cards trying to convince children not to eat chicken. Not surprisingly, according to Rice, “Not one principal responded to our letters.”

Well, maybe if Rice could go through a single interview without an abject lie. He told the Associated Press this whopper,

We would never use shock tactics with children. Children are so naturally empathetic to animals that we focus on showing chickens as intelligent with distinctive personalities, just like pet cats and dogs.

So when PETA promised to distribute Bloody Crown Meals to children at Burger King and Unhappy Meals at McDonald’s, those weren’t shock tactics? Here’s what PETA itself said about the Bloody Crown Meals,

Kids lured to Burger King by the free toy crown bestowed on young burger buyers will have plenty of food for thought when they receive PETA’s new promotional handout: a “blood-soaked” crown with golden points impaling pigs and cows. Below each skewered animal are factoids about how animals suffer on Burger King’s factory farms and a slogan that asks, “How Much Cruelty Can You Stomach?” The PETA crowns make their debut in Los Angeles on May 8 and then will appear at Burger Kings across the country.

Not to mention that last December PETA said it would distribute Your Mommy Kills Animals comic books to children whose parents were wearing fur. Again, here’s what PETA itself said about its plans to give the comic books away outside of holiday performances of The Nutcracker,

PETA activists – including cuddly, costumed raccoons and foxes – are making guest appearances outside performances of The Nutcracker across the country this holiday season with a cheeky message of compassion. As children arrive to see the “Dance of the Sugarplum Fairy,” some will be unaware that their mothers are already starring in a real-life horror story! PETA will be there to greet any fur-clad moms and their children with their newest anti-fur leaflet-PETA Comics presents…”Your Mommy Kills Animals!”</p?

Kids will see the bloody truth behind their momsÂ’ pretentious pelts. Accompanied by graphic photographs of skinned carcasses and animals languishing on fur farms, children will read: “Lots of wonderful foxes, raccoons, and other animals are kept by mean farmers who squish them into cages so small that they can hardly move. They never get to play or swim or have fun. All they can do is cry-just so your greedy mommy can have that fur coat to show off in when she walks the streets.”

Like everyone else at PETA, Matt Rice is first and foremost an opportunistic liar.

Source:

PETA’s latest message aimed at youngsters. Lynda Edwards, Associated Press, June 2, 2004.