That's an interesting website to use as a "source."

Hmmm...a hunting website. I'm sure they wouldn't make up anything about PETA, would they? And I generally don't take websites featuring a large picture of Homer Simpson on their front page very seriously, but gosh, you won me over with this one. I'm sure it's all real accurate.... duh.

Yes, it sure was. It made me feel much better. You call me a liar, which makes me think you're an asshole.

Care to comment on my link, which contains quotes from your organization's co-founder that are in direct opposition with what you are saying re: PETA's stance on animals as pets?

Sorry, you posted as I was typing. Are they misquoting your organization's co-founder?

Then don't give it them. BTW, all the animal rights orgs share mailing lists, if you're on one, you're most likely on them all. Why don't you ask PETA to take you off their list? I can give you the link if it's really that important to you. But somehow I have the feeling it's not.

Yes, they are. I bet the next website you'll come up with is activistcash.com or consumerfreedom.com. Those are real accurate too.

I'm not arguing with you anymore. If I'm such a fucking asshole, why are you bothering with this thread? I could care less what someone like you thinks of PETA (or me). So go have yourself a nice day, OK?

Once again, name-calling is such an effective way of dealing with things...You're making youself look really stupid. OK, I'm waiting with bated breath for you foul mouth to strike back.

Hmmm. Lots of people misquote the same person.

These folks are misquoting too?

Wait, how come you didn't throw in some four letter words there?

Believe whatever you want. Afterall, if it's on the web, it must be true, right? I've never heard of either one of those websites. Maybe you should come up with a quote from CNN, ABC, a wire service, etc. (like I did in the other thread) to back yourself up. Then you might be taken seriously.

Like I said before, PETA could care less what people like you think. So keep posting and keep whining, and we'll keep ignoring people like you.

You know, dar, I actually found this to be just a tad bit more "abrasive and obnoxious":

And check out Sycamore's "fucking idiot" comment in the other thread.

But that's OK, right? They use four-letter words to insult me, and I'm "abrasive and obnoxious."

All these are wrong too? The same quotes? The ones with cites from Harper's and Newsweek? Hmmm... I know! It's a media conspiracy!

Here here and here.

Same quotes, attributed to the same person, the co-founder of the organization, saying that PETA is against animals as pets.

Are you a little slow?

None of these are actual CREDIBLE news sites. Go to CNN.com, ABC.com, etc. or any LEGITIMATE site and see what you find about PETA. You gave me a list of sites I never heard of (and you probably never of) with quotes that came from God knows where. How do I know that "quote" actually came from harpers or Newsweek? Like I said, I could care less what you think. But if you're dumb enough to believe everything you read on some sham website, then that's your problem.

"Even people who care about animals are often unable to recognize or meet animals' many needs. Domesticated animals are in a catch-22 situation--they can no longer survive on their own, yet they retain many of their basic instincts and drives. Usually, they are isolated from their natural packs. Their bodies and souls yearn to roam--but, for safety's sake, they are confined to a house or yard, always dependent on their guardians, even for a drink of water, food to eat, or social contact."

Peta.org Factsheet

Hey PETA says CO poisoning is an acceptable form of euthanasia. This is from a story I pulled directly from the Associated Press' internal database.

"PETA said the video shows Ouderkirk explaining how to kill chinchillas by electrocution and neck-breaking. Because Ouderkirk has sold chinchillas to furriers as well as pet stores and labs, PETA says the USDA should require him to use a more humane method, such as poisoning by carbon monoxide."

Anyway, shame on me for fueling the fire. I really only did that search because I wanted to see where PETA has come up recently, and stumbled upon that nugget of info.

Regardless, may Matilda rest in peace.

No, I'm not a little slow. But it's apparent you're having some kind of problem. I guess if you want you can go hunt through the magazines I've given you cites for. I don't happen to have a 1990 Vogue or 1983 Harper's around, but I'll take about seventy cite's word for it. I first ran across Ingrid Newkirk's proclamation about putting an end to pet ownership in my mother's Vegetarian Times magazine last year. I have since seen it reprinted elsewhere and you can find it all over the web, along with her comment that if one animal could be killed to stop the spread of all diseases, PETA would be against it. She's a crazy bitch. Her principles are ridiculous. Her comments are asinine. And so are yours. I will not waste any more of my time with this nonsense. You're being deliberately inflammatory, talking out your ass about things that you know nothing about. You are making up bullshit about what your employer stands for, what they believe and what their intentions are. You had your ass handed to you many, many times in the PETA thread, and I will let those with who want to continue arguing with you do so here.

I'm off to kick a puppy.

I stand corrected. I wasn't aware of that, and I appreciate your bringing it to my attention in a respectable manner. For my own info, would you mind posting that Asociated Press link for me? I don't believe PETA has OK'd CO2 for euthanasia of cats and dogs, I think it's just for use on fur farms, for chickens, etc. I'd really like to know. Thanks!