this isnt new news, but just as all things on the left of the political spectrum everything they really are is always ugly.
the left is the height of orwellian reality, human rights groups who turn a blind eye to real abuse, terrible horrendous abuses perpetrated in the name of islam, womens groups who have never spoken out against stoning and murdering of women by islamist governments, and live only to harrass the basically good,~~the west which has a code of ethics and is by any reality based measure good.
well peta is just another example of the agenda of the group is in reality so ugly it is orwellian compared to the stated goal vs the real behavior. you name the leftist group and if you dig beneath the surface you find evil and ugly.
Animal lovers worldwide now have access to more than a decade’s worth of evidence showing that People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) kills thousands of defenseless pets at its Virginia headquarters. Since 1998, PETA has opted to “put down” 25,840 adoptable dogs, cats, puppies, and kittens instead of finding them “forever homes.”
PETA’s “Animal Record” report for 2010, which the animal rights group itself filed with the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, shows that PETA employees killed 94 percent of the dogs and cats in their care last year. During all of 2010, PETA found adoptive homes for just 44 pets.
Just 44 dogs and cats—out of the 2,345 PETA took in. Those numbers are abysmal, and they and offer little hope for homeless animals to escape perishing on PETA’s version of “death row.”
The Virginia Beach SPCA, just down the road from PETA’s Norfolk headquarters, manages to adopt out the vast majority of the animals in its care. And it does it on a shoestring budget
Why would PETA, an “animal rights” group, secretly kill animals at its headquarters? From a cost-saving standpoint, PETA’s hypocrisy isn’t difficult to understand: Killing adoptable cats and dogs—and storing the bodies in a walk-in freezer until they can be cremated—requires far less money and effort than caring for the pets until they are adopted.
PETA has a $33 million annual budget. But instead of investing in the lives of the thousands of flesh-and-blood creatures in its care, the group spends millions on media campaigns telling Americans that eating meat, drinking milk, fishing, hunting, wearing leather shoes, and benefiting from medical research performed on lab rats are all “unethical.”
The bottom line is that PETA’s leaders care more about cutting into their advertising budget than finding homes for the six pets, on average, that they kill every single day.
The Nazis were among the most enthusiastic environmentalists of their day, even the term ‘Ecology’ was coined by Ernst Haeckel, whose racial views served as precursors to Nazi eugenics. But while Nazi environmentalist believed that we were all really animals, they insisted that they had come a good deal further than others from the ape kingdom– modern environmentalists believe that we are all worse than animals. In their view we are both natural and unnatural. Natural because we come from the ape and unnatural because we are intelligent. We live on the planet, but we don’t belong on it. So the environmentalist view of man has become ominously similar to the Nazi view of the Jew.
The incompatibility of productive man with the natural world is as much as a fundamental tenet of environmentalism– as the incompatibility of the Jew with Germany was to the Nazis. Everything we do is destructive, because of what we are. We are tool builders, inventors and producers. And the environmentalist movement is aimed at convincing us to stop being these things. To turn off the lights, make do with less and march back to the caves with a few clever ad campaigns and a catchy tune. Zero Population campaigns and calls for mandatory one child families are the eugenics of environmentalism. The old eugenicists were concerned with improving the human breed by promoting the reproduction of some, and preventing the reproduction of others. Environmental eugenics treats all of mankind as an inferior race.
And not only mankind, but the animals that man has domesticated and bred– cows, dogs and cats. Why do you think PETA kills thousands of dogs and cats a year, opposes house pets, promotes the euthanasia of wild cats, pet spaying and its staffers have even been known to kidnap animals and then kill them. (Which is why campaign posters for PETA should feature Cruella DeVill, not some random actress looking to shore up her environmental credentials.) Or why the Global Warming crowd has made cow emissions into their whipping bovine. The environmentalist movement does not believe in animal rights, it doesn’t care about the cruelty of eating a hamburger– its goal is to eliminate domesticated animals.
Environmentalism is not motivated by a love for all creatures– but by a romanticized idea of natural wildness over human cultivation. It prefers the wild meadow to the wheat field, the swamp to the garden, the wolf to the dog, and the tiger to the house cat. This preference is not scientific, it is emotional, rooted in an antipathy to industrialization and human development. It wraps itself in the cloak of science, but it is actually whole reactionary, a longing for a romanticized past that never existed. In the environmental bible– man is the source of all evil. The transition from the nomadic to the domestic, the village to the city, and the craftsman to the factory, their version of original sin.
The environmentalist began with a distaste for human civilization and a fetishization of the rural, even though like Rousseau or Tolstoy they had nothing to do with a need for actual labor. The champions of “naturalism” were inevitably artists and writers who were enthusiastic about being in touch with nature. Then came the “Nature Faker” crafting myths about the genius and high moral standards of wild animals. Domestic animals in such stories were always wicked and dumb, while wild animals lived deep and spiritual lives out in the woods.
The world was divided into two polar opposites, the green and the gray, in an apocalyptic struggle. Either man would drown the world in industry, or he would return to a natural way of life through a lethal virus (Mary Shelley, The Last Man, 1826), a devastating war (H.G. Wells), oppressive social policies (Edward Bellamy) or eco-terrorism (The Monkey Wrench Gang). As time went on, the scenarios became more stark and the outcome apocalyptic culminating in the two great environmental myths, nuclear winter and global warming, that served the same purpose for environmentalists as apocalypses do for all religions. A time when the sinful order is overturned and the earth is renewed to make way for the faithful.
Man is the environmentalist’s devil. He must be beaten, broken and subjugated. Even the animals he has bred, who are the spark of his genius, must be taken out and killed. Take away his food and his power. Blame him for the natural cycles of the planet and the inevitable extinction of species that goes on whether he is there or not. Take away his technology and his inventions. Smother his religion and his faith. Tell him that the humblest bacteria is better than him, for it is dumb and follows its natural instincts, while he insists on using his mind. Take away his primacy and his learning. Put out his lights and leave him in the dark.
It is happening now as we speak. The environmental movement is tenacious, fanatical and deceptive. Its creed is the undoing of all human progress as the Kingdom of Gaia on earth. There is money to be made from that, as there is in all revolutions, money to be made by selling indulgences and endorsements. Wealth moving from the sinners to the faithful to atone for their sins against mother nature. But underlying the petty and the great inconveniences of living under an environmental regime, from dirty clothes to high taxes, the obligation to listen to the hypocrisies and false pieties of the Gorean clergy of environmentalism heating their mansions while the poor freeze on energy rations, is that darker reality. Environmentalism is an anti-human movement with a vicious hostility toward the civilization he has built. Whatever he has built, it must destroy.
The gap between darkness and light is a profound symbol in every civilization. The light of knowledge pitted against the shadow dark of ignorance. The light reveals, but the darkness hides. Civilization and the moral code exist in the light of awareness, but the darkness is home to unthinking bestial things. To call for a return to the darkness is a profound bit of symbolism. It is a ritual act laden with unknowing meaning. A civilization that celebrates a return to the darkness for even a single hour is longing for a return to a more profound form of darkness. A darkness of the soul.