PeTA animal killers case updates-Link

Thanks for the update! I was wondering what was going on with this.

[linkhttp://www.petakillsanimals.com/Trial_Day6.cfm]http://www.petakillsanimals.com/Trial_Day6.cfm[/link]

I'm not going to turn this into an argument pro or against PETA. What I would like to do though, is make people aware of the organization that this is linked to. I truly do not believe they care one little bit about the dogs or cats and this is what really bugs me. They are trying so hard to make sure that everyone sees this info when I really don't think their reason behind it has anything to do with the feelings they have for the animals. They are only trying, and this is a quote from one of them, "to shoot the messenger. ... We've got to attack their credibility as  spokespersons."
If you go to this link you will find some more info.

[linkhttp://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Center_for_Consumer_Freedom]http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Center_for_Consumer_Freedom[/link]

A little more info taken from the above web page. "Anyone who criticizes tobacco, alcohol, fatty foods or soda pop is likely to come under attack from CCF. Its enemies list has included such diverse groups and individuals as the Alliance of American Insurers; the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons; the American Medical Association; the Arthritis Foundation; the Consumer Federation of America; New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani; the Harvard School of Public Health; the Marin Institute for the Prevention of Alcohol and Other Drug Problems; the National Association of High School Principals; the National Safety Council; the National Transportation Safety Board; the Office of Highway Safety for the state of Georgia; Ralph Nader's group, Public Citizen; the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC); and the U.S. Department of Transportation.
In a 1999 interview with the Chain Leader, a trade publication for restaurant chains, Berman boasted that he attacks activists more aggressively than other lobbyists. "We always have a knife in our teeth," he said. Since activists "drive consumer behavior on meat, alcohol, fat, sugar, tobacco and caffeine," his strategy is "to shoot the messenger. ... We've got to attack their credibility as spokespersons." "
 

Lol...then they sound just as bad as PeTA...[sm=rotfl.gif]
 
Trial coverage is all I am posting, and EVERY article by ANY media outlet will be spun in whatever direction the writer tend towards...read it or don't. I trust people here are intelligent enough to make up their own minds.

It won't show me the Day 9 page!  Grrrr.  What happened on Day 9?????

i didnt want to copy/paste it to here due to copyright issue's, so i pm'd you the summary, hope that helps. it wouldn't let me paste the whole thing in the pm, i tried []

i would like to point out here that PeTA supports BSL.  they are looking for a total eradication of the bully breeds on the grounds that they are the most commonly maltreated dog breed.
maybe it's me, but i think the irony is astounding.
 
you can comment on this at their website.

I'm totally against BSL, that alone makes me against PETA I'm afraid even without this other stuff that been going on..... Any more updates?  My computer finally let me see Day 9 but there's nothing on that website now past that.

[linkhttp://www.petakillsanimals.com/Trial_Day10.cfm]http://www.petakillsanimals.com/Trial_Day10.cfm[/link]

Well that sucks...

[:'(][:'(][:'(][:'(]

Unfortuantely can't force them to live by their own standards.  Makes me SICK.

It's really sad and gives them no reason not to go off & do it again. I really hope that they will shut down soon but I doubt it..

PETA sucks. They are crazy extremists and it makes me SO mad that they got away with this. Hopefully this "opened some eyes" and hopefully people wont be so quick to support them in the future.

while i agree that PETA is ridiculous and needs to be stopped, i have to point out, for argument's sake, a few points:
 
the language used in the closing argument of the defense was not all that different from the way you might argue your way out of a traffic ticket: by nitpicking and manipulating legal language to fit your needs.  if you want a good reference, go to any traffic ticket "help sight" and you'll see what i mean.   lawyers depend on the language of the law and its interpretation.  what PETA did was morally inexcusable.  but legally, it was certainly excusable.  the line is very, very fine, as our legal system is based on our collective morality, which sort of means that the two go hand in hand and something theoretically couldn't be immoral without also being illegal.  our founding fathers, however, were very careful to allow checks and balances so that just because something is unpopular doesn't make it illegal.  take abortion, sodomy, and the death penalty as examples.
 
please do not mistake this as my support PETA.  as i stated earlier, PETA supports BSL, which is a hot button issue with me.  but i must point out that it is the LANGUAGE OF THE LAW that needs to be changed so that this never happens again.  however, changing the language of any law to fit popular opinion leads us down the proverbial slippery slope.  sometimes a court's decision can seem unjust, as in this case, but i still believe in the American justice system.  unless you believe in a massive conspiracy supporting PETA, you have to believe that the judge followed the letter of the law.  i hope i can expect the same if i ever find myself on trial.
 
lobby your congressmen and women to take a stand against PETA.  let them know how this trial feels to you.  if you are an American, and i know not everyone here is, that is your greatest responsibility.