What makes people say Peta are terrorists?

Question

I'm not a supporter but c'mon. They are an animal rights group.

Please explain why you think they are terrorists. I'm open to other people's views.

Answer 1

"Terrorist" is such a loaded word nowadays and PeTa's enemies know that. The "terrorist" label is intended to distract people from the crucial campaigns PeTA is waging against abusive businesses. It's all about scaring people into not supporting PeTA... often through taking quotations out of context, twisting the facts, or flat-out lying.

The Animal Liberation Front (ALF) does destroy property to save animals and sometimes people confuse PeTA with the ALF.

PeTA uses some unusual tactics (nudity etc), but PeTA is a peaceful tax-exempt charitable organization and not a terrorist group by any stretch of the imagination.

Answer 2

Because their methods are very similar to what known terrorist organizations do. Terrorism is not limited to armed attacks and suicide bombers. It can also mean logistical support and association with known terrorists organizations such as ALF and ELF.

Answer 3

While I admire PETA's ideals, their tactics are often such as to alienate the majority of people who might otherwise be open to listening to them.

While PETA has some good publicity programmes too, there are better ways of persuasion than actions comparable to violence or terrorism in the minds of the public.

MLK and Gandhi had some good ideas. I'd like to see PETA study their ideals more.

Answer 4

First off, anyone who just judges PETA without even getting to know the group, is just being idiotic. But in all fairness, PETA has been known to go to some violent extremes in their quest for humane treatment to animals. (And I say this as a supporter to PETA, but an unbiased citizen as well)  But that is a stereotype that hasn't been justified in years. It's not fair to hold a grudge against an establishment that is in essence, just trying to speak out for those without a voice.

Answer 5

“I wish we all would get up and go into the labs and take the animals out or burn them down.”

— "National Animal Rights Convention", Jun 1997

“Our nonviolent tactics are not as effective. We ask nicely for years and get nothing. Someone makes a threat, and it works.”

— Ingrid Newkirk, in the April 8, 2002 issue of US News & World Report , Apr 2002

“I will be the last person to condemn ALF [the Animal Liberation Front].”

— The New York Daily News, Dec 1997

“Would I rather the research lab that tests animals is reduced to a bunch of cinders? Yes.”

— New York Daily News, Dec 1997

“More power to SHAC if they can get someone’s attention.”

— People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals president & co-founder Ingrid Newkirk, in The Boston Herald, August 25, 2002

“Perhaps the mere idea of receiving a nasty missive will allow animal researchers to empathize with their victims for the first time in their lousy careers. I find it small wonder that the laboratories aren’t all burning to the ground. If I had more guts, I’d light a match.”

— The Chronicle of Higher Education, Nov 1999

That is enough for me.

Answer 6

peta people are so weird. its funny to watch them.

Answer 7

I don't know, but they are certainly shady sob's.

They say they don't condone the cruelty of animals, yet set cats on fire and toss them in the dumpster, and then say it was humane because they were "over-populated.."

Answer 8

I would never ware a fur coat, but when someone from PETA throws fake blood on a person because they have a fur coat on that would qualify as terrorism in my book.

When a PETA member harasses a blind person for using a guide dog, that is also terrorism.

Answer 9

It's the industry smearing them because it affects their bottom-line. Just like the industry is why people believe milk and meat are good for them and we can't live without them and they are the only sources of protein and vitamins when in reality they are pretty deficient.

But they are using an industry front/astroturf group posing as a consumer non-profit. The same one used by the tobacco and alcohol industries and the one that promotes fishing saying the mercury issue isn't that bad...

The industry is so afraid of PETA that they started trying to address PETA in deceptive, rumor-mongering ways which includes the ridiculous PETA "kills" site (and many others now) that often gets stated on Y!A as a "source" (the same PETA haters seem to answer all the PETA related questions on Y!A sometimes even asking their own loaded questions):

So it's the scam astroturf organizations created by the industry and a DC lobbyist for those same industries spreading the rumors about PETA.

The background info on that is:

Peta Kills, Activist Cash, Animal Scam are all industry groups in sheep's clothing from the same profit-driven DC industry lobbyist. Those are Rick (Richard) Berman groups, under "Center for Consumer Freedom" aimed at discrediting and marginalizing organizations such as PETA. Among some of his other pursuits is Mothers Against Drunk Driving, Greenpeace and more. In fact, anything that opposes his clients which include cigarette companies.

Who does Berman work for? He works for Monsanto, The meat, dairy, restaurant industries, the fishing industry, Wal-Mart, Tyson, Cargill, Dean Foods, big tobacco, the soda industry and the beer and alcohol industries among others.

Some of his scamming astroturf groups?

Center for Consumer Freedom Umbrella:

*   activistcash dot com

*   cspiscam dot com

*   physicianscam dot com

*   fishscam dot com

*   neoprohibition dot com

*   animalscam dot com and petakillsanimals dot com

*   obesitymyths dot com

The Employment Policies Institute

American Beverage Institute

Employment Roundtable

Center for Union Facts

Employee Freedom Action Committee

Funny he names his groups after scam so much since he is such a scammer. It's an abusive tactic where those who are the most guilty point at others. The other goofy thing is he claims to reveal funding for other groups (with his special spin) but won't let anyone see anything regarding his own funding.

Richard Berman is known as "Dr. Evil" (and he relishes that nick but I like to call him, Beezlebub). He starts "charitable" groups such as Obesity Myths, or Fish Scam then solicits donations via advertising in such places as Reader's Digest and bus shelters. The begging ads are spreading the ideas the industries want you to believe at the same time. It's all about deception and you are the target, played for a fool to become their victim (especially if you send the millionaire money believing he's a legit charity).

But then it gets even worse. The "charities" which get most of their money from the industries themselves such as Phillip Morris and Coca-Cola, then hire Richard Berman's consulting group, Berman & Co. to put together the campaigns. So, essentially he has drummed up his own business out of scamming all while manipulating the government rules, tax structures and the general public.

Notice how if you do a search on PETA anywhere who the sponsors are of the search or even the questions here about PETA.

Just found one of the tag team postings of Berman's group a couple weeks ago on the Boston Globe website. David Martosko works for Berman's scam operations as the "Director of Research" and is actually in the Penn & Teller anti-Peta episode (that Penn & Teller are that easily manipulated and/or shills in the pockets of big industry helping them to play us for fools has caused me to lose all respect for them -- better fools than tools). Oh, and further... Dave is the featured actor in the film "Your Mommy Kills Animals" which they funded as well.

Under Dave Martosko who is mocking Greenpeace at the Boston Globe is a comment by Gavin Gibbons commenting for the National Fisheries Institute (NFI) which is another industry front group. He is ironically attempting to throw doubt on a poster by saying that poster is making ad hominems even as his buddy Dave above has made one after another about Greenpeace. This time they're trying to obscure the issue of the collapse of the fish stocks in our oceans but they've also been very active trying to get people to believe there is no fish and mercury issues or PCBs/Dioxins (Monsanto uh-ohs) in fish and Berman's groups and the NFI even tried to convince pregnant women that the harm from mercury isn't worth having mentally delayed children (trying to scare us) which they say can be avoided by eating even more fish (on that one they tried to claim the March of Dimes was behind them but the March of Dimes had no idea and was not impressed about being co-opted).

See, they can't fight the groups like PETA and Greenpeace on facts so they try to do it through mocking and smear campaigns. That the industries would resort to these tactics shows just how much more scummy they are and how afraid they are you'll find out the truth about how they work and all because they just won't address any of the issues (that might cost money).

Berman's group under an entirely new incarnation has even been caught in the last few weeks spreading rumors in an attempt to get Gordon Smith re-elected as a senator not just prior to the primaries but the day after with full page ads in newspapers across Smith's home state trying to obscure truth about Smith's opponent with mudslinging divorced from Smith having to say he approves of the ad.

The problem with groups like Berman's is everyone who deals in it has to constantly watch their back because those are the types who eat their own.

====

And yes, the first link below is a PETA site addressing the mostly false and totally spun charges against them. The rest though are independent and include 60 minutes and the New York Times.

Answer 10

I support PETA because they are one of very few animal rights orgs out there in the world today. I dont agree with everything they do and believe, but they have gotten the word out and have helped many animals and convinced many people of the horrors animals face for food and entertainment. I dont beleive in the people that think that peta's videos and pics are propaganda.  You cannot fake a video and if the video gets through to one person and makes them no longer wear fur or makes them stop eating meat, I feel it is worth it. The videos dont lie and even if they do find the worst footage they can possibly find, that is fine by me. If cruelty like that happenes once, that is one time too many.  PETA is crazy sometimes and extreme, but not even close to the extreme that "ALF" (animal liberation front) is.  The can be hipocritacle at times, like saying dogs shouldnt be with people, well most of them have dogs as pets. And to not use honey, or ride horses, that is just kindof strange. (No offense to the vegans that dont eat honey :)

Answer 11

Because they make financial contributions to organizations like ALF & ELF that are listed by the U.S. gov't as terrorist organizations.

Answer 12

The organization has been criticized for some of its campaigns and for the number of animals it euthanizes,[9] as well as for allegedly associating with eco-terrorist groups.[10]

9. ^ Freeman, Darren. "PETA workers face 25 felony counts in North Carolina", The Virginian Pilot, October 15, 2005

10. ^ U.S. Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works, Hearing Statements, 05/18/2005