Wednesday, March 22nd 2006
Radical Vegans Cause Hostile Climate
Andrew Quinio reports on a surreal incident that took place on Sproul today:
Students from PETA, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, drew an angry crowd on Sproul after displaying images that compared animal treatment to the lynching and enslavement of black Americans. About a dozen Berkeley students furiously engaged the PETA members, accusing the animal rights group of racism. The situation intensified when one member of the crowd threw ketchup and mustard on the PETA display and another tore down part of the exhibit.
One image presented by PETA featured a chained elephant foot juxtaposed with the chained foot of a slave. Another showed black individuals hanging from a tree by their necks contrasted with the image of a cow being hung by its hind legs. Several black students shouted down the PETA students and called for the display to be taken down. One student who was upset by PETA’s comparison of slavery to animal mistreatment shouted amid tears, “I’m not trying to say that people should eat meat. I understand you, but the way you’re depicting our history, the way you are depicting the things that happened to us, the thing that happened to our ancestors, it’s not ok, it’s not ok!”
Read the whole thing for more details plus pictures and videos.
Look at all the dead trees going into cleaning that ketchup. Who has ketchup on hand to throw at displays, though?
Comment by Beetle — 3/22/2006 @ 11:34 pm
I don’t know why this is such a surprise coming from animal-rights extremists like PETA.
It has been known for quite a while that Neo-Nazi hate groups in Europe have been cross-recruiting from animal-rights hate groups, and vice-versa, which has lead to a growing amount of animal-rights extremists who subscribe to Hitler’s agriculture minister, Walther Darré’s “Blood and Soil Doctrine.” This type of cross-recruiting is apparently making its way to the U.S.
Interesting article from 2000 on the cross-recruiting issue in the UK Telegraph at this address:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2000/09/03/neo03.xml
And it is interesting that PETA’s little hate mongers refuse to protest PETA’s own wholesale slaughter of puppies and kittens in traveling vans, stuffing dozens of animals in cramped cages, then jamming drugs in them to kill them, then dumping the cute little corpses in trash bins. Away from the media cameras of course… See http://WWW.PETAKILLSANIMALS.COM for information and graphic images of PETA’s employees being arrested for animal cruelty after slaughtering dozens, perhaps hundreds of puppies and kittens.
Warning!: Graphic images of animal cruelty committed by PETA at the links below:
http://www.petakillsanimals.com/petaVictims.cfm
http://www.petakillsanimals.com/petaTrial2.cfm
Comment by Red Ryderz — 3/23/2006 @ 12:15 am
“Sengeeta Kumar, who led the PETA group, was surprised to have encountered such a reaction at UC Berkeley. “I was really hoping that people would think critically…”
They did. Some thought that this display dehumanized the antebellum slaves.
“it became very emotional and almost dangerous”
LOL, Militant Berkeleans - who’d thought?
“How many Berkeleans does it take to screw in a light bulb? Answer: Two. One to screw in the bulb and another to watch him do it.” -A little Duke humor.
“in the sense that people were threatening and pulling things down and it just became unsafe,” she said.”
Must have been conservatives, a new Berzerkelean study shows that Liberals as children are “smooth self-confident, resilient, self-reliant ” and conservatives are whiners.
“Kumar noted that her group has taken the exhibit to 13 different schools and never faced a hostile reaction. ”
There must be real liberals in those schools - none at Berkeley. Looks like they’re all conservative whiny-complainers with catsups and mustard on hand. Nice job Andrew R. Quinio. I like your original reporting.
Nice to keep up on the Berkeley buzz.
Comment by what — 3/23/2006 @ 12:25 am
I believe that the person who threw the mustard and ketchup on the Hanged sign got it from the GBC. She walked around from behind the crowd, threw the liquids at the canvas, yelled at the PETA people and stormed off.
I am most suprised by the fact that the PETA group didn’t expect this reaction from Berkeley.
Comment by Steveruleworld — 3/23/2006 @ 12:29 am
“I don’t know why this is such a surprise coming from animal-rights extremists like PETA.
It has been known for quite a while that Neo-Nazi hate groups in Europe have been cross-recruiting from animal-rights hate groups, and vice-versa, which has lead to a growing amount of animal-rights extremists who subscribe to Hitler’s agriculture minister, Walther Darré’s “Blood and Soil Doctrine.” This type of cross-recruiting is apparently making its way to the U.S.”
The article you cited doesn’t suggest that Neo-Nazi infiltration is anywhere close to the norm among animal rights groups, nor is PETA part of the extreme end of the animal rights movement anyway. It is simply outrageous that you would suggest this demonstration had anything to do with Neo-Nazis. Even if there were a handful of Neo-Nazis who vaguely affiliate with PETA, I can’t see how they would infiltrate the leadership, and I’m sure they would be immediately excluded if anyone found out.
I’m conflicted over demonstrations like this. I think there is certainly an analogy to be made, but I would like to think that animal cruelty persists out of (willful) ignorance rather than malintent. Since the motivations are quite different, the analogy falls apart. While I’m sure shock value displays like this convince some people, I would also suspect that this could outrage many more and close minds.
Comment by Donald — 3/23/2006 @ 12:49 am
I am a PETA member and am utterly disturbed by the title of your article, “Radical Vegans Cause Hostile Climate.” First of all, you are wrong to assume that all PETA members are vegans; there are are many PETA members who are ardent animal welfare activists and still eat meat. I used to eat meat even when I first signed up with PETA 8 years ago, until I gave it up completely in 2000.
Second, the “radical vegans” did not cause hostile climate. PETA’s uber-sensitive and intolerant detractors were the ones who committed the violent acts by yelling, screaming, and throwing ketchup and mustard at one of the banners. These detractors behaved like the fundamentalist Muslims who were “offended” by the Danish Mohammed cartoons. I saw the videoclips and I am appalled by the behavior of the two young black women who just verbally harassed one PETA activist. Instead of engaging in a calm and open-minded dialogue, these women chose to exploit political correctness as an excuse for their uncivilized behavior. Accusing the PETA images as racist was idiotic, since PETA members come from different racial, ethnic, educational and economic backgrounds.
Third, you need to understand that PETA has a long tradition of “dropping the bomb.” This is exactly what sets PETA apart from the other mainstream animal welfare groups. PETA is a non-profit organization, as such it relies heavily on publicity (and sympathetic celebrities) to draw people to its causes. Last year, PETA launched a campaign comparing the slaughter of animals to the murder of six million Jews. Certainly, there were protests from Jewish groups, but PETA also received support from several Jewish groups as well. PETA has been largely successful in influencing lawmakers into implementing and enforcing animal welfare laws and helping to prosecute individuals and corporations accused of horrendous cruelty to animals. Had it not been for PETA, I would not have known that “farm factory” animals are being fed ground animal carcasses (infected with diseases), that my tax money is being siphoned off to support canned hunting, or that major lab facilities continue to perform barbaric and useless experiments on animals.
Lastly, PETA is not a “terrorist” organization like how some critics portray it to be. Some PETA members may have spray-painted on fur coats and poked fun of Vogue editor Anna Wintour, but these acts are not any different from liberal peace activists who hurl a cream pie at David Horowitz’s conservative face and mock him whenever they have the chance.
Sincerely,
Rafa (UC Berkeley, Class of 1982)
Comment by Rafa — 3/23/2006 @ 7:22 am
Instead of “engaging in open dialouge” PETA comes in with staged, sensationalist images that are a slap in the face to black history. PETA uses those posters to try to shock students into donating to their organization of violent vegans. I’m glad that some Berkeley students stood up to these idiots.
Comment by Realist — 3/23/2006 @ 7:32 am
funny stuff to see the different goofs going toe to toe over pictures of events that occurred long ago.
It would have been funnier to see a picture of a giraffe with a slack rope around its neck and the other end around a tree limb wearing a puzzled look on its face.
Comment by ham sandwich — 3/23/2006 @ 7:46 am
get it?
long neck?
LOL
Comment by ham sandwich — 3/23/2006 @ 7:50 am
U.C. Berkeley: A Rally For PETA Brings Out The Animals…
The California Patriot, UC Berkeley’s conservative student publication, has an amusing story of liberal undergrads gone wild–with must-see video and photos. (via Michelle Malkin)
Must see the video.
RELATED:
Radical Vegans Cause Hostile …
Trackback by California Conservative — 3/23/2006 @ 8:11 am
“PETA uses those posters to try to shock students into donating to their organization of violent vegans.”
Students are many things. A great source of donations is not one of them. And PETA is non-violent.
Comment by Donald — 3/23/2006 @ 8:12 am
Rafa- Do you understand how drawing parallels between the mistreatment of animals and the tragical past of an entire community could lead to confrontation or be considered harassment?
Comment by Damon Z — 3/23/2006 @ 8:26 am
PETA is “non-violent” unless you consider that they donate to the ELF and stage animal massacres (so that they can get good pics).
Comment by Realist — 3/23/2006 @ 8:39 am
“PETA is “non-violent” unless you consider that they donate to the ELF”
Provide evidence.
“and stage animal massacres (so that they can get good pics).”
Provide evidence.
With the possible exception of the ACLU, no organization in America is subject to more misinformaiton than PETA. People have such a warped understanding of the animal rights movement, that they see PETA and they think ALF (with most having no idea what ALF is). As such, people are willing to believe anything they read about PETA.
Comment by Donald — 3/23/2006 @ 8:59 am
Oh yes, proving my point, Realist said ELF when he had to have meant ALF (which is also not true, PETA does not give money to ALF). PETA does give out literature/videos/almost everything they produce for free to groups that request it. Since the animal rights movement is very localized, I’m sure PETA has given items to groups with a stronger than normal ALF presence without realizing, but that’s hardly funding ALF, and besides, I can’t think of any reason why ALF would have much use for PETA material anyway. It’s not as if ALF is known for running vegan bake sales.
Comment by Donald — 3/23/2006 @ 9:05 am
“Rafa- Do you understand how drawing parallels between the mistreatment of animals and the tragical past of an entire community could lead to confrontation or be considered harassment?”
Yes, I do. And it could also lead to enlightenment, realization and healthy dialogue. You can be the most peaceful activist you can be (without using PETA-like tactics) and still attract detractors. In February 2003, a friend of mine was protesting the Iraq War peacefully (he was carrying a sign that said, “Stop U.S. Imperialism” while chanting and all of a sudden someone from the counter-protest crowd threw an orange at him that hit him in the left eye. Even non-violent Buddhist monks get attacked these days by rowdy and murderous Islamists.
I’ve learned that the best way to express your opinion towards something is to consider the other party’s claims, think about them critically, search for evidence, and then decide whether you agree or disagree. Raising your voice, committing physical acts of violence, or threatening other people is useless.
Comment by Rafa — 3/23/2006 @ 10:12 am
And it should also be pointed out that its impossible to give money to a singular organization known as ALF. The group only exists to the extent that people claim affiliation with it. They are comprised of loosely connected cells with no hierarchy uniting them.
Comment by Donald — 3/23/2006 @ 10:37 am
Calling all idiots! NO, I did NOT mean the ALF. I meant the “ELF” (as in, the Earth Liberation Front). The ELF is a terrorist organization that uses violence to further their ideals.
Here is your evidence: http://www.animalscam.com/references/peta_elf1.cfm
Don’t let PETA brainwash you guys.
Comment by Realist — 3/23/2006 @ 12:28 pm
A href=http://www.independentconservative.com/2006/03/23/peta_pimps_blacks/>independentconservative.com
“Well PETA’s degradation of humans continues. California Patriot has record of them continuing their debased activities at Ultra Liberal UC Berkeley. And once again PETA only succeeded in ticking people off.”
Soylent Green crackers will solve this problem? Would you like a Berkeley undergraduate Psyche major with catsup and mustard on that? Cures population overgrowth too!
Outrage on the green NEW HAVEN… “Once again, black people are being pimped. You used us. You have used us enough,” Esdaile said. “Take it down immediately.”
I guess Darwin should start rolling in his grave. Lol. Where is that missing link again, Darwin?
Synopsis:
Andrew Quinio’s report making the internet rounds. Good job.
Comment by what — 3/23/2006 @ 3:13 pm
Tell it Like It Is: II…
A case against analogies, with pictures and video (Via. Cal Patriot)
Students from PETA, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, drew an angry crowd on Sproul after displaying images that compared animal treatment to the lynching and enslav…
Trackback by Are You NKay? — 3/23/2006 @ 3:47 pm
Hmm… seems like they get “the most hostile reaction evar” quite frequently.
Comment by Beetle — 3/23/2006 @ 5:08 pm
[…] Some interesting stuff going around in Berkeley lately. I was actually on Sproul when the PETA incident happened. I must have been there before the fight erupted though because I just saw this one girl shouting in the direction of the posters. Honestly, I think the whole situation was rather funny - two groups that you wouldn’t think ever think would have a problem with each other suddenly find a reason to get into a fight. And come on - what does slavery of animals have to do with slavery in America? Should we now never mention or depict slavery in any form? I don’t get it. […]
Pingback by aniv.info » Blog Archive » Thursday, March 23rd 2005 — 3/23/2006 @ 5:12 pm
Apparently the story will be featured on O’Reilly tonight. If anyone wants to catch the 8pm replay, it’s featured during the 1st half of the show.
Comment by patr — 3/23/2006 @ 5:34 pm
Yeah, it was on O’Reilly Factor, about 15-20 minutes into the show. Way to go, Andrew Quinio!
I can see how PETA would use images like these. The whole ’shock factor’-thing. I don’t agree with their use of them, though. There have been some organizations I can think of that used, erm, shall we say ‘extreme’ posters and such to get people’s attention. In a way it’s almost a good thing because at least people became aware of the issues, but it can get out of hand. There are plenty of organizations who have perfectly legitimate arguments, but I just don’t like the way they present them.
Comment by Veronica — 3/23/2006 @ 6:09 pm
“I’ve learned that the best way to express your opinion towards something is to consider the other party’s claims, think about them critically, search for evidence, and then decide whether you agree or disagree.”
Rafa- I completely agree with you. So the remaining question is in your opionion did the PETA prosteters consider the other’s party’s claims and think about them critically. In other words, did they consider the African American Community and think about the implications of paralleling animals mistreatment with slavery?
Comment by Damon Z — 3/23/2006 @ 6:10 pm
For those of you who are ignorant to the truth of this, there is no PeTA group on campus. There is an animal advocacy group, but that group is in no way shape or form affiliated with PeTA.
by the way, Realist, can you believe everything you see on the interenet, i read this article and saw several misrepresentations of what actually happened in it, going to show that just because it is published doesn’t make it true
Comment by John — 3/23/2006 @ 11:31 pm
John, Please inform me of the misrepresenations. I too was there and can assure you that everything was accurate. The animal group on campus was invovled with this PeTA display. I interviewed one of the group members who helped coordinate the exhibit.
Comment by A Quinio — 3/23/2006 @ 11:47 pm
*misrepresentations
Comment by A Quinio — 3/23/2006 @ 11:48 pm
Recently, while brousing a Yahoo! message board, I encountered a message from a person using “outrigger_n1gger” as a Yahoo! ID.
On March 9, 2006, I filed a complaint with Yahoo!, explaining that the use of a racial slur in a Yahoo! ID offended me. They sent an automated reply, reminding me of the profanity and ignore filters available on Yahoo! I responded, saying that the ID passed through the profanity filter, and a poster’s ID must be viewed at least once before being placed on ignore. They asked me to fill out a form, which I did.
I checked to see how many other people were allowed to use the term “n1gger” in a Yahoo! ID. Here are the results of that search:
http://members.yahoo.com/interests?.oc=t&.sb=0&.id=n1gger&.fn=&.ln=&.em=&.kw=&.g=0&.ar=0&.st=0&.lo=
I was shocked to find that Yahoo! allows 80 or more people to use “n1gger” as part of an ID, including such violent and hateful words as “n1gger abortion is crimestoppers”, “n1gger beater 101″, “n1gger hunting season88″, and “n1ggers look best hanging.” These references to beating, hunting and lynching African-Americans are not only offensive, but threatening.
If you think that Yahoo! should not allow racial slurs and threats in their ID’s, you may sign a petition at http://www.petitiononline.com/yahooids/
Comment by lamprod — 3/24/2006 @ 4:27 am
“For those of you who are ignorant to the truth of this, there is no PeTA group on campus. There is an animal advocacy group, but that group is in no way shape or form affiliated with PeTA.”
While BOAA is an independent group, the display (a travelling PETA exhibit) was allowed on campus because BOAA sponsored it. So there was a connection for this event, though you’re correct that they are otherwise unaffiliated (except in the way PETA is affiliated with every animal rights group, providing literature and whatnot).
Comment by Donald — 3/24/2006 @ 8:18 am
“Calling all idiots! NO, I did NOT mean the ALF. I meant the “ELF” (as in, the Earth Liberation Front). The ELF is a terrorist organization that uses violence to further their ideals.
Here is your evidence: http://www.animalscam.com/references/peta_elf1.cfm
Don’t let PETA brainwash you guys.”
A one-time donation of $1500 is trivial and probably has a reasonable explanation, but from what I’ve since read, PETA has provided multiple explanations, though where these websites found the explanations remains unclear. Of the answers given, providing travel expenses for a Congressional hearing was the most plausible to me, but who knows.
As a note of clarification, it was donated to the North American ELF, which is the legal press office that posts ELF cell actions. Still not conforting, but it is a distinction.
I was wondering why I didn’t hear about this story previously, and it seems that the only people making the connection are anti-animal rights/anti-PETA/industry lobby groups. The press has largely ignored the story which makes it difficult to figure out what happened.
Comment by Donald — 3/24/2006 @ 8:27 am
Donald, thanks for your post. I find it hard to deny that this donation happened (given the evidence), and even though it was only 1500 bucks, what is PETA thinking giving money to a well-known terrorist organization? (ELF are the guys who blow up people’s Hummers and then grafitti anti-American slogans all over them). My guess is that the mainstream press paid little attention to this because it is a waste of their time to chastize PETA (because every halfway-intelligent person already knows that PETA is full of idiots). PETA is such a joke. All you PETA supporters out there, take a good look at your organization. Animal rights is a good cause, so why is it that this one group has so many haters? Think about it. That being said, pass the ketchup.
Comment by Realist — 3/24/2006 @ 9:11 am
BOAA apologized.
Comment by Beetle — 3/24/2006 @ 3:22 pm
To The Berkeley Patriot A Wasteful Masquerade
Here is some info you left out of your article. I hope this sheds light on how non-scientific this was.
The below responce is from Michelle Malkins’s website. Michelle Malkin • March 23, 2006 04:11 PM.
An anonymous tipster sends some intriguing information …. [ some parts repeated here so I could de-link the text]
The nursery school cited is actually the “Harold E. Jones Child Study Center,” on Atherton St. in Berkeley. It used to have a different name if I remember — I think it used to be called the “Atherton Child Study Center.”
Go to this URL to see their Web site.
If you want proof that this is indeed the school used for the study, go to this URL.
What is so significant about this? Well, the Harold E. Jones Child Study Center is only open to children of U.C. Berkeley faculty and staff:
The University Preschool offers full-day developmental child care for preschool-aged children of UCB faculty and staff.
UC Berkeley faculty was rated the most left-wing in the country: 91% of teachers there were classified as liberal:
“University of California, Berkeley (91 percent liberal).”
? The below responce is from Michelle Malkins’s website. Michelle Malkin • March 23, 2006 04:11 PM.
An anonymous tipster sends some intriguing information about the “whiny kids grow up to be conservatives” study conducted by left-wing UC Berkeley prof Jack Block.
Wondering where the nursery school kids who were the subjects of the study came from? Check this out:
I know exactly which “nursery school” was used as the basis of this study. It is not mentioned anywhere in the text of the 16-page pdf you provided for downloading, but I know because — well, because I know people who were some of the subjects of this study (and of other similar studies). And an extremely important fact about this school renders the entire study false.
The nursery school cited is actually the “Harold E. Jones Child Study Center,” on Atherton St. in Berkeley. It used to have a different name if I remember — I think it used to be called the “Atherton Child Study Center.”
Go to this URL to see their Web site.
If you want proof that this is indeed the school used for the study, go to this URL.
This page is part of the “Institute for Human Development,” which is the department at Cal which runs the school. It is part of and connected to the Child Study Center site link above. About halfway down on this page (search for “Jack Block”) you’ll see that they mention that the data gathering part of this study was done at the Center:
“A renowned longitudinal study of development originated by Jeanne and Jack Block began with children at three and followed them at 4, 5, 7, 11, 14 18, and 23 years of age.”
Compare that to this text from the final study (in the pdf):
Pre-school children subsequently relatively conservative at age 23
The University Preschool offers full-day developmental child care for preschool-aged children of UCB faculty and staff.
(The “Preschool” is a subset of the “Child Study Center.”)
In other words, ALL of the children in that study were the offspring of U.C. Berkeley professors, lecturers, and staff members.
The reason the Child Study Center is so popular is that they offer free/cheap child care/nursery schooling in exchange for the parents allowing their kids to be “studied” by psychologists all day every day.
And here’s the clincher (you probably already saw it coming):
“University of California, Berkeley (91 percent liberal).”
So, we have documented proof that the “whiny babies” in this study were basically ALL the children of liberal parents.
In my view, although this may not be fact, lol., The whiny kids that turned-out to be conservatives in this sham-study were in fact not whining, but screaming in their little voices – “Help me, get me away from these Wackos!” I hope this helps.
Comment by what — 3/26/2006 @ 12:07 am
The reason that PETA members made the analogy is because they see animals as equal in worth to humans. What is bad treatment to humans is also bad treatment to animals. I think that’s their point. That doesn’t make them racist, it just makes a whole lot of people think they are complete nutcases.
Comment by cw — 3/26/2006 @ 1:39 am
“UC Berkeley faculty was rated the most left-wing in the country: 91% of teachers there were classified as liberal:”
Did you read the article that you link to? It goes in great detail to show how flawed or misleading the results are. The title of the article is “Flunking Statistics
The right’s disinformation about faculty bias,” for goodness sake! By linking to that article, however, you make it appears as if the article backs up the statistic, which in fact, the article does not.
Comment by Archangel — 3/28/2006 @ 5:05 am
Hey wheres the NAACP where JESSIE JACKASSON wheres the usial news media anyway? thats a truly racsis display by these PETA jerks
Comment by spurwing plover — 4/9/2006 @ 2:38 pm