PETA Wants To Sue Anonymous HuffPo Commenters

MarkWhittington writes, quoting himself: "PETA is incensed over an article in the Huffington Post that details that organization's unsettling practice of euthanizing animals in a Virginia facility that many have assumed is a no kill shelter. According to the New York Post, PETA wants to sue some of the people who have left comments on the article. The problem is that, following the practice of many on the Internet, many of the comments are under assumed names or are anonymous. PETA is attempting to discover the true identities of their critics so that it can sue them for defamation."

Talk about hypocrisy, PETA kills most animals..

[stox]

in its shelters. "In 2011, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) behaved in a regrettably consistent manner: it euthanized the overwhelming majority of dogs and cats that it accepted into its shelters. Out of 760 dogs impounded, they killed 713, arranged for 19 to be adopted, and farmed out 36 to other shelters (not necessarily "no kill" ones). As for cats, they impounded 1,211, euthanized 1,198, transferred eight, and found homes for a grand total of five. PETA also took in 58 other companion animals -- including rabbits. It killed 54 of them."

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/03/petas-terrible-horrible-no-good-very-bad-history-of-killing-animals/254130/ [theatlantic.com]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nathan-j-winograd/peta-kills-puppies-kittens_b_2979220.html [huffingtonpost.com]

Re:hypocrisy

[symbolset]

All animals are made of food. Many forms of plant and fungus are edible but others have evolved to be poisonous to animals - including humans. But if it moves, it's edible. Not only that, but mobile animals are nutrient concentrates that provide more energy per pound than any sort of plant.

Re:hypocrisy

[PlusFiveTroll]

I'll make it

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuru_(disease) [wikipedia.org]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transmissible_spongiform_encephalopathy [wikipedia.org]

Dear PETA...

[laughingcoyote]

You're a bunch of liars, hypocrites, and assholes. And do feel free to give it a shot, we have excellent anti-SLAPP provisions in my state.

Re:hypocrisy

[Anonymous Coward]

Human meat is nutritious - much like pork, though it can be gamey if the animal is too old. Human kid meat is served in various locations today including Northern China, North Korea, Pakistan and some parts of India - though it is always labelled "special pork" or some such. Historically humans butchered for meat were called "long pig".

I wish it weren't so, but it is so. We are not so far from "soylent green" as you might think.

Re:Talk about hypocrisy, PETA kills most animals..

[Anonymous Coward]

in its shelters. "In 2011, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) behaved in a regrettably consistent manner: it euthanized the overwhelming majority of dogs and cats that it accepted into its shelters. Out of 760 dogs impounded, they killed 713, arranged for 19 to be adopted, and farmed out 36 to other shelters (not necessarily "no kill" ones). As for cats, they impounded 1,211, euthanized 1,198, transferred eight, and found homes for a grand total of five. PETA also took in 58 other companion animals -- including rabbits. It killed 54 of them."

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/03/petas-terrible-horrible-no-good-very-bad-history-of-killing-animals/254130/ [theatlantic.com]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nathan-j-winograd/peta-kills-puppies-kittens_b_2979220.html [huffingtonpost.com]

I fail to see any regret in their actions of 2011, since they continued in 2012: http://www.vi.virginia.gov/vdacs_ar/cgi-bin/Vdacs_search.cgi?link_select=facility&form=fac_select&fac_num=157&year=2012

I'm no fan of PETA, but...

[Loba Art]

Let me preface this comment by stating that, as an animal advocate, I am not in ideological alignment with PETA and I do not generally support this organization. That said, Nathan Winograd's HuffPo article amounts to little more than malicious hearsay and it is incredibly biased, leaving out critical information in favor of whipping lazy readers into a furor. PETA does not euthanize adoptable animals. PETA has an open-door program in place to accept and euthanize sick and injured animals which cannot be accepted into other animal shelters, in order to prevent them from being abandoned otherwise. Limited resources necessarily force animal shelters to pick and choose which animals they will accept and when they will accept them -- leaving some unwanted animals with no other place to go but the roadside or the dumpster. People who don't want their pet, or can't afford to treat the pet's illness or injury, will abandon them. It's horrible, but it happens all the time. If there isn't a place, especially in a large and poorer urban area, that will accept any animal at any time regardless of condition, people abandon them. It's that simple. As someone who has lived in rural areas for more than fifteen years, I've seen the little-discussed end result of the failed "no-kill" mission and limited-admission shelters -- a constant stream of aggressive, injured, and sick pets dumped on country roads because the local shelter turned them away. As far as I can tell, PETA has not attempted to deceive the public about their program or its purpose -- in fact, PETA maintains a website about the program called "Why PETA Euthanizes." PETA appears to be quite public about this program and why they believe it is necessary. Furthermore, Winograd is believed to be responsible for posting anonymous comments on articles by or about him to make it seem as though he has reinforcements. Truth is an absolute defense to slander/libel claims, but PETA absolutely has the right to sue for defamation if the comments are untrue. Further reading: http://www.whypetaeuthanizes.com/ [whypetaeuthanizes.com] http://www.opposingviews.com/i/society/animal-rights/rebuttal-huffington-posts-nathan-j-winograd [opposingviews.com] http://www.houstonpress.com/2009-01-29/news/barc-sucks/6/ [houstonpress.com]

Re:Oh brother

[Samantha Wright]

It's actually a lot worse, and I say this as someone with no love for gun rights. You'll need a strong stomach for the reason why, though [imgur.com]. (I mean it.)

Re:A name for PETA

[mosb1000]

How do you sue people for telling the truth?

1) Fill out the forms. A Civil Cases Cover Sheet, a Summons, and a Complaint all must be filled out in order to file a lawsuit. You must include facts concerning the case and a legally recognizable cause of action in order for the suit to proceed. It is best to have an attorney help you do this to make sure the forms are filled out correctly. See USCourtForms.com for sample forms you can use.

2) File the complaint. Make two copies of your forms, go to the courthouse, and file the originals with the court according to their instructions. Make sure you provide the forms in the format specified by the court, to prevent delays from occurring. In most cases you will have to pay a filing fee, but this can be waived if you show you can't afford it. Keep the two extra copies.

3) Have the defendant served. The next step is to notify the defendant that he or she is being sued by serving him or her with a copy of the court documents. The case cannot move forward until this happens. Documents must be served by someone over 18 who is not part of the case. You cannot serve your own documents.
Ask for help at the courthouse if you aren't sure who should serve your documents.

4) Wait for a hearing. After the defendant has been served, the court will review the lawsuit and instruct you on how it will move forward.

Not true - hyperbole

[aepervius]

Local shelters kills more even the private held one.

But the difference lies in adoption rate. PETA kills 95+% of what it get given not really bothering giving animals as pet, after all "pets"! are in genral against their policy. Shelter private or public depending on the animal get 40 to 60% back to adoption.

Re:I'm no fan of PETA, but...

[Loba Art]

"So they just happen to ONLY take in un-adoptable animals?" Well...yes. PETA operates a shelter of last resort. They aren't "competing" with regular shelters. They aren't targeting adoptable animals. You won't see PETA's shelter in the phone book next to other animal shelters. http://www.whypetaeuthanizes.com/understanding-petas-shelter.html [whypetaeuthanizes.com] They are specifically taking in animals that "animal control" will not accept. If PETA didn't accept these animals 24 hours a day, with no fees or waiting lists, what do you honestly think would happen to them? What would be your solution to the problem of people abandoning sick and injured pets that they can't or won't care for?

Re:Oh brother

[Samantha Wright]

No doubt so shall we all.

Re:I'm no fan of PETA, but...

[DerekLyons]

Let me preface this comment by stating that, as an animal advocate, I am not in ideological alignment with PETA and I do not generally support this organization.

No, but you certainly appear to have drunk their kool-aid... because you repeat their party line almost word for word.
 

That said, Nathan Winograd's HuffPo article amounts to little more than malicious hearsay and it is incredibly biased, leaving out critical information in favor of whipping lazy readers into a furor.

There's nothing in there that people who actually follow animal rights issues haven't heard before - and it's not all hearsay. This shelter has been under fire for years for it's euthanasia policies, and PETA's involvement with questionable euthanasia policies in other locations is well documented.
 

As far as I can tell, PETA has not attempted to deceive the public about their program or its purpose -- in fact, PETA maintains a website about the program called "Why PETA Euthanizes." PETA appears to be quite public about this program and why they believe it is necessary.

That sound you heard was the article's point zooming over your head - while your head was either deeply buried in the sand. PETA advertises the facility as a shelter - but makes no effort to operate it as a shelter. There's no adoption hours, no counselors, no rehabilitation, nothing but a freezer to store bodies.
 

Furthermore, Winograd is believed to be responsible for posting anonymous comments on articles by or about him to make it seem as though he has reinforcements.

I see... it's wrong for Mr Winograd to spread hearsay... but it's perfectly acceptable for you to do so. And you're amazingly ignorant of the state of animal advocacy in the US if you believe that there's so few opponents to PETA that an author has to create sockpuppets to make it appear that people support him.
 
tl;dr version: Either you're a PETA sockpuppet, or you're amazingly ignorant the facts.

Re: Oh brother

[Anonymous Coward]

You are nuts. The NRA wants to enforce guns on every living being. Guns is Big Money, not freedom.

Re:I'm no fan of PETA, but...

[EvilSS]

We know they encourage it with their support for breed-specific euthanasia policies. Then there is the specific case of the Ahoskie, North Carolina indecent. You know, where "...a rash of unwelcome discoveries of dead animals dumped in the area. According to veterinarian Patrick Proctor, the PETA people told North Carolina shelters they would try to find the dogs and cats homes. He handed over two adoptable kittens and their mother, only to learn later that they had died, without a chance to find a home, in the PETA van..."

More to the point, where is the proof that they don't, other than their own PR site I mean.

Re:A name for PETA

[Millennium]

You can sue people for whatever you want. The lawsuit might not stand up in court, but if you can bankrupt the person with legal costs (or otherwise force them to settle with you), then you don't have to win the case.

This is called a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation, or SLAPP, and many states have laws against it. Unfortunately, not all of them do, and while I don't know what state PETA is suing in, worth noting is that Virginia (the state where the shelter in question is located) does not.

Re: A name for PETA

[silentcoder]

From the original huffington post article we find, among other things, a quote by a veterinarian who handed them a mother cat and her kittens who were perfectly healthy. The PETA representatives said they would be "easy to adopt" and the vet was wanting to find them homes as they were in perfect condition.

The PETA guys killed them in their van mere moments after telling that blatant lie.

Isn't it odd that every other shelter organisation around has far fewer euthanizations and far more adoptions than PETA's shelters do ? That most of them keep animals for several months before considering euthansia while PETA animals rarely make 14 days - even if they are in perfect health ?

That animals coming to PETA with diseases which other shelters routinely treat and cure and then adopt the animals are simply left to die untreated ? Like Parvovirus - average survival rate among infected animals at shelters: 90%, survival rate at PETA shelters: 0%.

Re: A name for PETA

[RoknrolZombie]

Well that, and I seem to remember hearing from a very good source that Ingrid Newkirk masturbates using lobster tails.