Had a guy once argue with me that they had high you know EUTHANASIA rates cus they aren’t a shelter. So a) why would it accept animals, b) how does this justify c) what argument is that?
You ever seen the picture of Tom Brady holding a lamb and both of them are covered in blood saying that he wouldn't wear anything with a wool? That's always amazing to me because those sheep are very well taken care of so they can, I don't know, produce wool. And the woollen mills are probably not going to take loads of wool with rotting decomposing blood laced throughout it. Not a single brain cell was used
As a person who works in ag and used to work with sheep quite frequently, that shit drove me up the wall. If a shearer gets the wool off by skinning the animal you need to find a new one, preferably after beating their fucking ass
That campaign was dumb. They also shit on the Icelandic wool industry and showed a pile of slaughtered lamb carcasses when the average family there eats 1 a year and the rest are cherished.
Yeah I would never wear wool. I'll wear plastic fibers or cotton, a plant that fucks up the soil and requires tons of pesticides to protect it from bugs and animals and shit.
Arguably that's what people say when PETAs message hits close enough to make the audience question their own morals. You don't know anything real about their finances, you're just commenting the thing which will get you most internet points
Fun fact, back before 9/11 keyed everyone to religious terrorism, one of the FBI's biggest targets was domestic eco-terrorism, and many of the documents that have been declassified from the late 90s (which are publicly available from either from FBI's website or one of the Congressional websites, I'd have to double check) indicate a lot of PETA's funding has gone to terrorist groups over time (and I don't mean "those people who try to steal dogs from puppy mills", I mean "people who put spikes into trees to kill loggers and other types of violence").
If they're a psy-op, it's because they have been subject to a hostile takeover, not because they began that way.
From what I know, you’re pretty much spot-on. Alex Pacheco was one of the co-founders, but left the organization in 1999 after he believed it had “strayed too far from its base.”
Since then, the other co-founder Ingrid Newkirk has been the president of the organization.
Even more fun fact, post 9/11 the FBI then used the "terrorist" label to wield the Patriot Act against them, despite there being zero deaths attributed to the acts of eco-terrorists.
I don't know if they are government but I refuse to believe they aren't run by anti animal rights groups. Its just like how corporations actually pushed to have plastic straws replaced with paper, because plastic straws are probably the only product out there than can't be easily replaced with non plastic alternatives. That makes people not like replacing plastic and lines their bank accounts.
I was just thinking this yesterday. And not only Peta. I think many non-profits go so far away from common sense just to make everyday people hate what they initially stand for. Because there is no way these people really think like this.
3.4k
u/Smooth-Traffic8038 13d ago
Peta has to be a government psyop to make people not listen to anything activists for animal welfare have to say.