From: itsmine@med.unc.edu (Greg Popken)
Subject: Re: PETA in hot water
Organization: UNC-CH School of Medicine
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 01:30:53 GMT

In article <kbanaian.100.0@bernard.pitzer.claremont.edu> kbanaian@bernard.pitzer.claremont.edu (King Banaian) writes:
>In article <1992Dec8.025720.13151@pellns.alleg.edu> romingk@pell3l0.alleg.edu (Karl Rominger) writes:

[DELETED: Federal grand jury investigation of PETA]
Bernard writes:
>This is sick:  when one interest group can use a law as a gag order against 
>another interest group.  Thankfully, the courts have thrown out a lot of 
>recent RICO convictions as unconstitutional, and it would be my guess that 
>this happens here too.  But RICO gets used to freeze assets and in essence 
>disarm the accused before trial.

I   can't believe this.  Tying things up in court is a trademark of
the AR movement.  A few years ago at UCLA Berkley members of the AR
movement objected to the condition in the animal care facility.  Under
the guise of animal welfare.  The university said that they would build a
new state of the art animal care facility at the cost of a few million
dollars.  When construction began the same groups protested the building
of the new facility under the guise of environmental causes.  They sued
the university and lost.  After delaying building for almost two years
and at the cost of over one million dollars construction resumed.  Th
That's one million dollars spent without improving conditions for just one
animal.  In addition, I think this points out the true agenda of at least
some of the AR organizations.  They claim they are interested only in
improving conditions, when infact their true agenda is abolishment.
 OA>
Ingred herself has been on record as promoting ideals that will make in
more and more expensive to do research, until it simply become too expensive.

BTW, Bernard who is this other **special interest group** that is going after
your sacred PETA.  The FBI?  The Federal Gov.?  Get off it!

One, last thing.  This just makes me so (excuse my language) gosh darn mad.
I can't recall all the times I have read comparisons between what I do and
what the Nazis did to the Jews.
Then I mentioned the Nazis anti-vivisection slant.  I clearly stated that I
was not attempting to implicate the present day AR movement in any way.
But, everyone goes off on me. Saying things like crying "NAZI" is only
avoiding the issue on my part.  Comparing the AR movement to the Nazis
demeans my pro-research cause.

Then here again "this makes me sick:   When one interest group can use
the the law as a gag..." What in the name of salt peter is this!  Using
the law as a
stall tactic and to tie up resources is PETA's most powerful tool.  And
they use it to its fullest.  They have mastered the art of using the loops
in the law to better their cause.  I'm sure Ingred is proud of that.

I can't believe that these people use these tactics with out a second
thought.  Then when it "appear" that the same tactics are being used
against the the cry foul.

It so pathetic is almost funny.

                                            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.                                *******************************
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals