HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: itsmine@med.unc.edu (Greg Popken)
Subject: ALF update
Originator: itsmine@cahaba
Organization: UNC-CH School of Medicine
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 20:13:12 GMT

FRom NABR update vol XIV, No 1
Jan. 15, 1993
*****************************************************************

According to the Moscow-Pullman Daily News story, the illegal activities
of the Animal Liberation Front(ALF) are under investigation by the grand
jury in New Orleans.  A Peaople for the Ethical Treatment of Animals
(PETA) spokeswoman told reporter Ken Olsen that the New Orleans was formed
after federal agents alledgedly found plans for an illegalaction against
the Delta Regional Promate Center in Covington, Louisiana, were the
remaining two so-called Silver Spring monkeys live.  The plans were
discovered during the search of an East Coast home of a PETA volunteer. 
The volunteer, whose name has not been released, is expected to appear
before the New Orleans grand jury this later this month.  Olsen also
reported that a "woman described as a wealth Texas socialite and activist"
was subpoenaed in December.

The ALF is under investigation by grand juries in MICH.,Org., Utah, and
Wash.  According to Olsen, the U.S. attorney in Grand Rapids attempted to
serve a subpoena to the former administrative assistant to PETA founder
Ingrid Newkirk.  The former employee, however, had not worked for PETA for
several yaers, and the subpoena was refused.  Seven PETA staff members,
including Newkirk and Co-founder Alex Pacheco, have been subpoenaed.

*********************************************************************


This is your neck of the woods Russ.
Is there anything you want to get off your chest?
(Just Kidding)

Please excuse the typos.  I'm in a hurry.


Greg Popken
-- 
The opinions expressed here are my own.  **   Knowledge goes on forever! 
Which is to say they belong to me.       **   Spelling stops at the 
And these opinions, which belong to me,  **   end of the page.
are mine.                                *******************************
From: unglenie@ford.ecn.purdue.edu (Robert J Unglenieks)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
Subject: Re: I was born to eat meat.
Date: 27 Jan 93 06:01:20 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network

Alex L. Pace:
>> I was born to eat meat and so were you.  Take a look at your own 
>> dentistry!  These nice sharp "canine" teeth I have are just great for
>> ripping the tasty flesh of my animal meal.  

Russell Lawrence writes:
>Orangs and gorillas also have canine teeth?  Were they "born" to
>eat meat?

Russell, orangutans are not a good example since the word means 
"man of the woods".  Well, then again maybe it is a good example .... :-)

Rob U
--
-       Rob Unglenieks             REAL race cars DON'T wear BOWTIES       -
-  "It is the foreign element that commits our crimes.   There is no       -
-   native criminal class except Congress."  [Samuel Langhorne Clemens]    -
-  (Don't look at me, I DIDN'T vote for Clinton.  Will Engineer For Food)  -
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
From: russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence)
Subject: Re: Combine'd' laziness
Organization: WP Group
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 19:52:01 GMT

From article <C1IC1D.H8A@ccu.umanitoba.ca>, by ens@ccu.umanitoba.ca ():
> In <C1G3Ht.H36@wpg.com> russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence) writes:
> 
>>  "Livestock account for 15% to 20% of global methane emissions ---
>>   about 3% of global warming from all gases."
> 
>>From Durning, Alan and Brough, Holly. "Taking Stock: Animal Farming
>>and the Environment", WorldWatch Institute: Washington, 1991.  BTW, 
>>the source of info for this statement was a joint report from the Japan
>>Environment Agency and the EPA.  
> 
> Statistics estimated by an organization philosophically opposed
> to farming animals, even when "based" on someone else's legitimate data
> fail to impress me. It's much too easy to manipulate statistics with
> various assumptions. I've seen creationists "prove" the world is
> only 4000 years old based on legitimate data; all you need to assume is
> that the speed of light was different in the past...

What makes you think that the WorldWatch Institute is philosophically
opposed to animal agriculture?

> the original data are probably couched in carefully expressed assumptions
> and the uncertainty is almost certainly much larger than the 25% you quote.
> I wouldn't be surprised if WWI then chose upper limits of various
> approximations and after a factor of 2 here, an order of magnitude there,
> came up with 15-20%.

Read the text and check their sources.

-- 
Russell Lawrence, WP Group, New Orleans (504) 443-5000
russ@wpg.com   uunet!wpg!russ
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
From: russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence)
Subject: Re: Retraction Honesty?
Organization: WP Group
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 06:57:08 GMT

From article <1k1m6pINN65h@geraldo.cc.utexas.edu>, by alexpace@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Alex L. Pace):
> In article <C1FFnH.EnJ@wpg.com> russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence) writes:
> 
>>Don't you think it's dishonest for an organization to circulate
>>the original article without circulating the retraction?
> 
> Oh and I'm sure the PeTA newsletter, being a paragon of honesty, will
> surely circulate a public retraction of the now-proven-to-be-false cat
> screams in the brain trama experiments.  They will probably also personally
> apologize to the good doctor for their memebers late night calls and
> threats and for misleading the public and congress.  In an open letter to
> the world they will praise the doctor's work and demand that it be
> reinstated.

Several points:

-- Are you certain that the allegation re: cat screaming was based solely
   on a single letter?  If it is, then I would agree that apologies are
   in order, but I suspect that the Times-Picayune newspaper will play
   one or two more cards before the game is officially closed.  They, too,
   made these same claims.

-- Are you certain that PETA members were responsible for the alleged
   threats and phone calls?

-- Criticism of the doctor's work went far beyond the issue of cat 
   screams.  Congressman Livingston, for instance, was concerned that
   the project was a waste of government resources.  Such criticism
   still stands, regardless of the self-serving flak cooked up by the
   AMA and served by Sixty Minutes.

-- A local attorney, Jeff Sevy, filed an FOIA request for a copy of
   Carey's proposal when details of the project first leaked out of LSU.  
   Unfortunately, Carey had deleted large sections of the document 
   because they were alledgedly "proprietary".  Why would a "good 
   doctor" hide his work from public view, given the fact that he's 
   received two million bucks from the taxpayers to support his
   research?

-- 
Russell Lawrence, WP Group, New Orleans (504) 443-5000
russ@wpg.com   uunet!wpg!russ
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
From: russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence)
Subject: Re: Silver Spring monkeys
Organization: WP Group
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 22:08:10 GMT

From article <mhulsey-270193131400@fatrat.fcs.uga.edu>, by mhulsey@hestia.fcs.uga.edu (Martin Hulsey):
> In article <C1H64E.255@wpg.com>, russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence) wrote:
>> 
>>[...]
>> You're referring, of course, to the assumptions that you, 
>> yourself, were circulating...  after you jumped to conclusions.
> 
> Precisely how did I jump to a conclusion?

Weren't you the guy who was falsely claiming that Gerone was an
apologist for PETA?

-- 
Russell Lawrence, WP Group, New Orleans (504) 443-5000
russ@wpg.com   uunet!wpg!russ
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
From: russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence)
Subject: Re: Silver Spring monkeys
Organization: WP Group
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 21:24:00 GMT

From article <viking.727602219@ponderous.cc.iastate.edu>, by viking@iastate.edu (Dan Sorenson):
> In <C16Gz0.66o@wpg.com> russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence) writes:
> 
>>What sort of legal investment are you talking about?  What makes you
>>think that public prosecutions are funded by private organizations?
> 
> 	Who brought the charges against Taub?  

The state of Maryland.

> They paid the charges,
> so it should be easy to find out who paid for the prosecution.  

The state of Maryland.

> Who
> paid for the defense is likely to be Taub.  Was he re-imbursed once
> he was exonerated?  Evidence of a seriously screwed legal system.

Are you saying that governments should reimburse all parties who are tried 
on criminal charges and found innocent?   Or, is Taub a special case?


-- 
Russell Lawrence, WP Group, New Orleans (504) 443-5000
russ@wpg.com   uunet!wpg!russ
Xref: sparky talk.politics.animals:11472 alt.peeves:19458
From: banta@abingdon.Eng.Sun.COM (242 lbs before cooking)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals,alt.peeves
Subject: Re: "... man tends to be lazy"
Date: 22 Jan 1993 16:43:24 GMT
Organization: FizzBall Racing
NNTP-Posting-Host: abingdon

In article <C188qs.Ks6@wpg.com> russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence) writes:
>Nah.  I have a girlfriend.

Congrats.  Bovine or porcine?

>You're right.  I didn't have time, but I do plan to read some of
>your articles in the future.   

I hardly expect that.  You haven't been able to touch any of the
issues I've brought to your attention, and, instead, have spent all
your time conjecturing about what I might be doing to my naughty bits.
If you're *really* that interested, I can send you a couple GIFs.

>In particular, I'm looking forward to
>your publication of "Why I'm Still a Virgin" and "How to Avoid Social 
>Entanglements".   Let me know when they're scheduled to appear. 

Maybe you have me confused with some of the WorldWatch authors, Russ.
*They* write fiction, I don't.

andy
banta@abigndon.sun.com
--
"The only sports are auto racing and bull fighting, all the rest are games."

						--Ernest Hemingway
Newsgroups: det.misc,ou.general,talk.politics.animals
From: Rosemary Waigh <rwaigh@zooid.guild.org>
Subject: Traps (was Re: Follow up (was Re: Detroit Channel 7 "Company"))
Reply-To: rwaigh@zooid.UUCP (Rosemary Waigh)
Organization: The Zoo of Ids
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 03:00:34 GMT
Followup-To: talk.politics.animals 

In article <swood.727730557@vela> swood@vela.acs.oakland.edu (Scott Wood - EVENSONG) writes:
>I was also upset to see that when threatened at the end of the show by one
>of our more flamboyant AR-locals, Jennifer Dodson, in regards to the pain
>caused by leg-hold traps, Kathleen Marquardt's demonstration was practically
>undiscernable due to a zoom out that regularly accompanies the end of the
>show.  In other words, she whipped out a trap, set it and put her hand in
>it showing the whole audience then removed her hand to show there was nothing
>wronge.  I might add, I did not see her even flinch, and from my experience,
>is was a moderate sized trap.

From the Fall 1992 issue of _PETA_News_ ("Ask Carla" column):

"Q:  My friend had her county board ready to ban leghold traps when a trapper
showed up at a board meeting and snapped a trap closed on his hand to show how
'painless' it was.  This convinced officials to table their ban plan.  Why
didn't he hurt his hand?             -- Fran D., Springfield, Ill.

"A:  Wouldn't it be grand if those 'sportsmen' would just keep their traps
shut?  Next time *you* provide the trap, so the trapper can't pull that old
tension adjustment trick.  Buy a standard No. 1 1/2 or 2 and have the trapper
put just one finger, not his whole hand, in it.  I guarantee you he'll head
for the hospital as soon as he's out of the room.  Or you demonstrate its
strength by letting it snap a pencil in two...."

Ro
rwaigh@zooid.guild.org

Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
From: jhoskins@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (James M Hoskins)
Subject: Re: CBS's "60 Minutes" damns PeTA
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 21:53:02 GMT

In article <C1FB0G.DK3@wpg.com> russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence) writes:
>
>First, let's find out if the cat research truly helped the doctor to save
>this soldier's life.
>
>--
>Russell Lawrence, WP Group, New Orleans (504) 443-5000
>russ@wpg.com   uunet!wpg!russ


What if it didn't truly save this soldier?  What if it did truly
save another soldier?

I know little about Carey's research.  Do you have some special
knowledge that would shed light on its legitimacy?





:
From: banta@abingdon.Eng.Sun.COM (242 lbs before cooking)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
Subject: Re: X% unethical [was Re: why hunting is unethical]
Date: 22 Jan 1993 16:14:37 GMT
Organization: FizzBall Racing
NNTP-Posting-Host: abingdon

In article <C181wI.J42@wpg.com> russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence) writes:
>This, too, is irrelevant.  It's hat-wearing that causes the brain
>tumors --- not my beliefs.

But, Russ, aren't brain tumors a human concept?  Just like chemistry?

If you don't believe, they won't exist.  You gave yourself the simple
solution already, why not use it?

drew
banta@abingdon.sun.com
--
"The only sports are auto racing and bull fighting, all the rest are games."

						--Ernest Hemingway
From: alexpace@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Alex L. Pace)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
Subject: Re: LSU Cat Shooting
Date: 26 Jan 1993 10:02:51 GMT
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin
NNTP-Posting-Host: sylvester.cc.utexas.edu


In article <C1G9JG.HsA@wpg.com> russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence) writes:

>It certainly opens a new round of discussion.  At the moment, I'm
>waiting for responses from Congressman Livingston, two reporters
>from the Times-Picayune, and the local attorney who launched the
>local protest against the experiments.   

I may not always agree with you but I admire your commitment to seeking out
opinions for yourself.  I dont know anything about your newspaper but I
think that you'll find the attorney and congressman will be biased sources
of information, perhaps you should also read the report to the G.O.A. that
the all-star team of neurologist wrote.

>My "feelings" aren't relevant here.  What counts are the facts
>and reasons, pro and con. 

I think that the choice to become a vegan is a choice of "feelings" or
emotions much more than they can ever be about facts.  You arnt just going
to walk up to someone and show them a list of facts and convert them.  I
think that an emotional call to the "plight of dumb animals" would be a
much more effective means of conversion.

>Be that as it may, it was Greg Popken
>and Martin Hulsey who invoked the "necessary" and "justifiable"
>argument on behalf of animal research.  I'd appreciate it if
>you would challenge them to qualify their use of these terms
>by explaining whether or not:
>
> -- sport hunting is "necessary" and "justifiable", and hence,
>    not cruel.
>
> -- mink coats are "necessary" and "justifiable", and hence,
>    not cruel.

I really think you are out of line with this set of questions Russ, Martin
and Greg asserted that animal research was justifiable because of the human
lives it improves and even saves.  If we consider saving human lives
important, then the reasearch can be called necessary.  To my knowledge
neither Martin or Greg attempted to justifiy mink coats as necessasary.
With this in mind it seems that you are merely shooting at the sky trying
to discredit the opinions of these men.

I think that sports hunting is not cruel because the animals are put to use
and are killed swiftly, same with coats.

alex the omnivore


Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
From: swood@vela.acs.oakland.edu (Scott Wood - EVENSONG)
Subject: Re: Ingrid's lies.
Organization: Oakland University, Rochester MI.
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 19:47:42 GMT

mhulsey@hestia.fcs.uga.edu (Martin Hulsey) writes:

`In article <C0v599.62x@wpg.com>, russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence) wrote:
`>For example, Audubon Zoo maintains a haven for 
`>a sizeable number of animals who couldn't survive in truly 
`>natural surroundings.   In such a case, a decision to confine
`>an animal might stem from our concern about the animal, rather
`>from our own selfish wants and desires.

`If animals have "rights," how can you justify confining one that "couldn't
`survive in truly natural surroundings?"  Aren't you simply depriving some
`other animal of its dinner?  Do you want them to become vegetarian also?

	"My ideal is 'a return to the garden of Eden where even the
	 animals are vegetarian.'"
				-Andrea Reed, Louisville Fund for Animals
				 (_Lexington_Herald_, 1990)

What do you think?

swood
-- 
 All Month  Rabbit and Crow are legal to hunt all month in Michigan
  Current   Michigan Canada Goose special late season still open
      (Southern Michigan Game Management unit only w/stamp)
         <<<<<<  Only nine months until bow season!!! >>>>>>
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
From: russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence)
Subject: Re: Hunting is Ethical
Organization: WP Group
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 07:47:00 GMT


One more point:

From article <1993Jan21.221243.18639@cbfsb.cb.att.com>, by motto@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (mary.rita.otto):
mo> Human beings respect the interests of others only when forced.
mo> 
mo> So, what does that mean?  It means murder being illegal only matters
mo> if you can't get away with it.

It would matter to the victim and his friends, even if you could
get away with it.  The fact that it might not matter to the 
perpetrator is a reflection on her own character and/or stupidity.

The lions mentioned in Will's previous post, for example, are 
undeniably "sentient", but they may lack the "sapience" and 
knowledge to fully understand the consequences of their actions 
and to alter them in some way.  Mature, mentally healthy human 
beings, by contrast, are capable of understanding the impact that 
their actions have on other individuals, in spite of their 
ability to "get away" with a particular action.  

-- 
Russell Lawrence, WP Group, New Orleans (504) 443-5000
russ@wpg.com   uunet!wpg!russ
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
From: itsmine@med.unc.edu (Greg Popken)
Subject: Re: 60 min. Cat Shooting
Organization: UNC-CH School of Medicine
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 16:59:52 GMT

In article <1993Jan26.104007.2736@netcom.com> loca@netcom.com (John Hoag) writes:
>itsmine@med.unc.edu (Greg Popken) writes:
>
>> Using fully anesthetized cats (a point not mentioned by the AR movement)...
>
>You know, I love all this horseshit about "fully anesthetized cats."  The
>point being made is that the cats did not suffer, and therefore the
>research was ok.  Greg, do you seriously give half a shit if the cats
>sufferred?  

Yes.

>If so, is it within your keenly calipered mental powers to
>imagine what it must have felt like when the anesthesia wore off (or even
>wore down)?  

"keenly calipered"!  You flatterer, you.  You know I'm a sucker for a good
line.
But, alas no.  I wasn't there and I'm not familiar with the proceedures. 
However, you can rest asured I'll find out.

>
>Or is the "fully anesthetized cats" argument just a rationalization to
>cover the fact that you really don't care if suffering is inflicted on
>animals?
>
No.

Greg Popken

-- 
The opinions expressed here are my own.  **   Knowledge goes on forever! 
Which is to say they belong to me.       **   Spelling stops at the 
And these opinions, which belong to me,  **   end of the page.
are mine.                                *******************************
From: romingk@alleg.edu (Karl Rominger)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
Subject: PETA and the flip flop over pets
Date: 27 Jan 93 14:34:25 GMT
Reply-To: romingk@alleg.edu
Organization: Allegheny College


I just read a tid bit.  Seems some time ago PETA was runnin around saying  
pets are wrong.  Well then PPF estimated that this cost PETA about 2  
million in donations from pet owners.   Suddenly after this happened PETA  
changed it's beady little mind, and said,"Hey pets are ok, just keep the  
cash flowin."

So it seems that AR beliefs can be bought.  So how about all of us  
hunters, trappers, fishermen, and farmers pool our resources and pay  
Animal Rightists to change their views.  Seems to work.  And it would get  
em off our back.  So Ingrid I'd like to give you a condo and credit cards  
in Florida.  You just shop and live "high off the hog" and forget about  
the animals.  OK.  And alka whats your price?  I mean your probably in  
PETA or a comparable cash trap anyhow.

Karl
From: alexpace@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Alex L. Pace)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
Subject: Re: LSU Cat Shooting
Date: 28 Jan 1993 09:42:49 GMT
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin
NNTP-Posting-Host: donald.cc.utexas.edu

In article <C1H7H5.2AM@wpg.com> russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence) writes:

>What if the animals weren't killed swiftly, and their bodies were
>left to rot on the ground?   Would you then argue that sport hunting
>is cruel?

I'd call that target practice, not hunting.

   How about amusement sports like bullfighting, cockfighting,
>and dogfighting?  In view of the fact that the human observers enjoy
>such activities, would this lead you to say that such sports are
>not cruel?

I would call that explotive.  Probably cruel.  But is it wrong?  These
things are outlawed.  Perhaps it is not as it could be because the animals
in these events were born and bred for this purpose, they would not have
existed otherwise.  Do we have the right to say their existance is wrong?
Please dont misunderstand me, I dont support these activities but it does
raise some interesting questions as to our right to determine their
existance.

>require (substandard) medical care.  If it could be established that 
>a two million dollar investment would have saved the lives of one
>hundred of these people, would you be in favor of the expenditure?

Sure I would, just because money is spent on experiments doesnt mean money
cant be spent on healthcare.  In other words the two are not mutually
exclusive.  By the way, we spend much more on healthcare than we do on
medical research and not all medical research involves animals.

>Russell Lawrence, WP Group, New Orleans (504) 443-5000

alex the omnivore
From: alexpace@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Alex L. Pace)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
Subject: Retraction Honesty?
Date: 25 Jan 1993 21:31:05 GMT
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin
NNTP-Posting-Host: foghorn.cc.utexas.edu

In article <C1FFnH.EnJ@wpg.com> russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence) writes:

>Don't you think it's dishonest for an organization to circulate
>the original article without circulating the retraction?

Oh and I'm sure the PeTA newsletter, being a paragon of honesty, will
surely circulate a public retraction of the now-proven-to-be-false cat
screams in the brain trama experiments.  They will probably also personally
apologize to the good doctor for their memebers late night calls and
threats and for misleading the public and congress.  In an open letter to
the world they will praise the doctor's work and demand that it be
reinstated.

alex the omnivore
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals,alt.activism,rec.food.veg