http://statenews.com The events of this week especially should make people question what “humane” treatment of animals really means. Students Promoting Animal Rights, or SPAR, took the opportunity this weekend to protest the Royal Hanneford Circus at Breslin Center. Members of the student group claim the circus employs cruel practices and treatment of its animals, despite the circus’s denials. en-us Foundry4 Wed, 19 Nov 2008 05:55:40 -0500 Thu, 24 Apr 2008 00:55:12 -0400 webmaster@statenews.com http://statenews.com/index.php/comment/15654/view “People, for the most part, are reasonable and need more than YouTube.com videos, random statistics and public relations flack to form an opinion or take action. “ Where is this wonderland of logic and reason where you reside? In my world, REALITY, it is exactly you tube videos, random statistics, and public relations which people use to form their opinions. Wed, 16 Apr 2008 08:30:29 -0400 http://statenews.com/index.php/comment/15654/view http://statenews.com/index.php/comment/15655/view Protest all you want!! It won’t make a bit of difference!!! The massive single-digit “army” of protestors stopping traffic and harassing families will truly change the world.PETA is a terrorist organization that couches its destructive hooliganism in the “warm and fuzzy self-righteousness“of animal “rights”.These eco -terror scum burned the offices of an MSU researcher in Ag.Hall sometime back.Why in hell are you giving them ANY credibility at all?! Is it because you admire their use of fire against the University? Wed, 16 Apr 2008 08:35:50 -0400 http://statenews.com/index.php/comment/15655/view http://statenews.com/index.php/comment/15656/view If the SN believed that people would care about the actual information behind Dr. Weber’s research, they would have had someone read Dr. Weber’s papers and write an article on his methods. However, they are content with soundbites and don’t care for the details that Dr. Weber and other researchers like him stake their careers, reputations, and livelihoods on. Or, SN, you can prove me wrong! If someone reads through his papers (many of which are freely available either online or through our library’s electronic resources) and discusses the minutiae of the methods with researchers (ex. Dr. Breedlove) and knowledgable opposition, I would be entirely out of line. It’s up to you! Wed, 16 Apr 2008 08:36:15 -0400 http://statenews.com/index.php/comment/15656/view http://statenews.com/index.php/comment/15658/view Why are the people that are so opposed to animal testing are the same people that are so strongly in favor of embryonic stem cell research? Wed, 16 Apr 2008 08:52:03 -0400 http://statenews.com/index.php/comment/15658/view http://statenews.com/index.php/comment/15663/view I’m with Dan. Wed, 16 Apr 2008 09:06:13 -0400 http://statenews.com/index.php/comment/15663/view http://statenews.com/index.php/comment/15672/view “Why are the people that are so opposed to animal testing are the same people that are so strongly in favor of embryonic stem cell research?” Because one is a sentient being, whereas the other is a microscopic cluster of cells. Are you saying you abhor the use of human cells, but are fine with animal abuse? Wed, 16 Apr 2008 09:29:40 -0400 http://statenews.com/index.php/comment/15672/view http://statenews.com/index.php/comment/15688/view Dan- why is that people who oppose a woman’s right to choose are the same people who oppose providing support to those children when they are born into poverty? Wed, 16 Apr 2008 11:08:50 -0400 http://statenews.com/index.php/comment/15688/view http://statenews.com/index.php/comment/15689/view I find it strange that you would publish an editorial calling for more information about the process for reviewing animal research at MSU, including suggesting “there needs to be a better process to make animals a last resort in testing”, which would suggest that you have actually gathered some information about that process. I am the chair of the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee that in fact formally asks and considers precisely that question of alternatives before we will approve any research with animals, including Professor Weber’s research. Yet none of you or your staff have asked me a single question about this issue. If you actually want to know about the issue of seeking alternatives before conducting animal research, you should ask questions before making accusations. Wed, 16 Apr 2008 11:15:22 -0400 http://statenews.com/index.php/comment/15689/view http://statenews.com/index.php/comment/15694/view While I certainly believe in the freedom of speech, the simple fact of the matter is that PETA often makes baseless accusations based on their personal interpretation of complex philosophical issues while ignoring or downright falsifying the facts of the matter. Computer models are in no way complex enough to help in most research. Think about what your implying- if that were true then we wouldn’t need to do drug research on humans, we could just plug it into the computer. Models help- but they are limited. (Just yesterday the leading hurricane expert warned that his previous models about global warming and hurricanes were in fact incorrect, and that people need to reexamine his research). Similarly, other forms of research simply don’t always muster. So, I would suggest that the State News actually research the points before they publish letters to the editors as well as editorials when clearly they can be proven wrong in literally under 10 minutes. Most State News editorials simply just state whatever they feel like without actually doing anything but researching Facebook opinions. And what’s truly sad is these are the same people who graduate and move on to CNN, ABC, etc… So, while certainly there are brilliant and interesting journalists out there, most of them barely qualify above the audience they write for- 4th graders. Wed, 16 Apr 2008 11:51:41 -0400 http://statenews.com/index.php/comment/15694/view http://statenews.com/index.php/comment/15699/view To clarify, I wasn’t insulting their intelligence, but that is how they present themselves in their articles. And their skills have nothing to do with them being white or women. Journalists no longer (if they ever actually did is debatable) do research. They hear something and echo it back and then simply analyze what they echo. A disturbing trend with the internet and cable is that stories become old so quickly that nobody actually has time to verify information or do informed analysis. Further, since news teams follow a capitalistic trend as well as cater to advertisers, there is no incentive to actually perform under the basics tenets taught in journalism 101. Just because your audience wants to hear something, doesn’t mean it is correct or what you should provide- one more reason why capitalism is in fact very inefficient and essentially only provides ease and efficiency to those already in power. The truly hilarious thing though is that this style of thought doesn’t just happen at MSU. Ivy league journalists and thinkers portray themselves in the same way all the time. The peer pressure that society puts on its members is one of the greatest limits to free speech and thought. One of the fundamental limits to the functioning of society today is political correctness- which if you think about what both of those words mean together you will land straight in 1984. Yet, our university, our congress, our neighbors all argue that this is what is necessary. Modern thought centers on absolute agreement with our peers rather than actual discourse and discussion. The State News is certainly a product of their environment; yet, with all their philosophical arguments they make in their limited columns every week, you’d think they’d have the capability to break outside of the very, very small box they exist in. Wed, 16 Apr 2008 12:12:34 -0400 http://statenews.com/index.php/comment/15699/view http://statenews.com/index.php/comment/15717/view ooo ooo I have another one for Dan. Why is it that the same people who soapbox about “working hard” to earn your money and proclaim “no government handouts” are the same people who furiously lobbied to eliminate the estate tax? If you inherit 100 million dollars from your parents or grandparents, does that count as “working hard your whole life” to earn it? Wed, 16 Apr 2008 13:18:47 -0400 http://statenews.com/index.php/comment/15717/view http://statenews.com/index.php/comment/15744/view SCREW PETA! FREE MICHAEL VICK! Wed, 16 Apr 2008 17:29:04 -0400 http://statenews.com/index.php/comment/15744/view http://statenews.com/index.php/comment/15924/view I am a researcher and I am involved in animal research and what the author doesnt understand is that there are many laws that limit what we can study and how we do it. There is the animal welfare act that governs the use of animals and committees that have to approve the use. Cell based assays and in silico simulations are not always the best substitute for a whole organism. Fri, 18 Apr 2008 13:47:41 -0400 http://statenews.com/index.php/comment/15924/view http://statenews.com/index.php/comment/16016/view April 21, 2008 UPDATE: PETA Killed Over 97 Percent of the Animals in its Care in 2006 2,981. That’s how many dogs, cats, puppies, kittens, and other “companion animals” died needlessly at PETA’s hands in 2006. According to the group’s own records, PETA employees killed more than 97 percent of the flesh-and-blood creatures in their care that year. Compare that with the Norfolk (where PETA is based) Society for the Protection of Animals, which euthanized only 38 of the 1404 animals placed in their care that year. Even the Norfolk city pound managed to release or adopt out more than half the number of animals it euthanized. While PETA collects millions in donations by pretending to advocate for the welfare of animals, the group has killed 17,400 pets since 1998. Some animals are killed at PETA headquarters and stored in a giant walk-in freezer. Others are killed in roving death vans and tossed into dumpsters. In fact, less than three percent of the animals handed over to People for the “Ethical” Treatment of Animals actually survive. » read more Celebrity PETA Supporters Have Blood on Their Hands Today the Center for Consumer Freedom criticized the celebrity supporters of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) in a full-page advertisement in Variety for endorsing the animal rights group even as it kills thousands of animals in its care. » read more All About the PETA Trial The North Carolina animal-cruelty trial of two PETA employees ended with a surprising result, but the animal rights group admitted under oath that it does, indeed, kill large numbers of animals. Our daily reports from inside the courtroom provide a rare look at one of the radical organization’s most secret programs. » read more » Day 1 » Day 2 » Day 3 » Day 4 » Day 5 » Weekend » Day 6 » Day 7 » Day 8 » Day 9 » Day 10 » Summary PETA Spent $9,370 on a walk-in freezer Shocking Crime-Scene Photos » read more PETA’s Dirty Secret Hypocrisy is the mother of all credibility problems, and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) has it in spades. While loudly complaining about the “unethical” treatment of animals by restaurant owners, grocers, farmers, scientists, anglers, and countless other Americans, the group has its own dirty little secret. » read more and see the proof PETA’s Lame Response We’ll say this much for PETA’s leaders: they’ve got an answer for everything. If you write to PETA and ask about our “PETA Kills Animals” website, the group will send back a form letter including some of these lame excuses. » read PETA’s weak response PETA Trial in the News » CCF op-ed in the Virginian-Pilot (Norfolk, VA) » The Sunday Standard-Times (New Bedford, MA) » The Virginian-Pilot (Norfolk, VA) » The Daily Trojan (University of Southern California) » The News & Observer (Raleigh, NC) » The Sunday Telegraph (London, UK) » The New York Post » Court TV Press Release: PETA Employees Let Off the Hook, But Animals They Killed Weren’t So Lucky Spread the word about PETA’s dirty secret! You can link to us with any of our standard-size banners. » read more Recent News Animal Activists Hijack Dr. King’s Legacy (4/4/08) In the fight to keep activists honest, few things are more frustrating than out-and-out fabrications. And the intellectual liberties taken by animal rights devotees are particularly egregious. Witness the fictional animal “rights” quotation, attributed to Leonardo da Vinci, which is literally chiseled into the reception… » read more Humane Society Joins Canada’s Seal Hunt (4/1/08) In a controversial move this morning, The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) revealed a new plan to stop Canada’s annual commercial seal hunt for good. Teaming up with People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), The HSUS will ensure that this year’s… » read more Did You Know? From July 1998 through December 2006, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) killed over 17,400 dogs, cats, and other “companion animals.” That’s more than five defenseless creatures every day. PETA has a walk-in freezer to store the dead bodies, and contracts with a Virginia Beach company to cremate them. Not counting the pets PETA spayed and neutered, the group put to death over 97 percent of the animals it took in during 2006. And its angel-of-death pattern shows no sign of changing. » read more Pets Killed By PETA » Read profiles of PETA and The Humane Society of the United States Home | News | Press | Ad Campaigns | Tell A Friend | About Us | Contact Us Mon, 21 Apr 2008 05:41:44 -0400 http://statenews.com/index.php/comment/16016/view http://statenews.com/index.php/comment/16457/view To the comment above me and other comments, yes PETA does a lot of bad stuff. And I know most hardline vegans completely hate PETA because of all the bad stuff they do. I still see them as a mainly positive organization that has a lot of mainstream appeal though. Could PETA do a better job at helping end animal suffering? Yes But without PETA I think there would be a lot less vegans and vegetarians today. I’d say PETA kind of provides the introductory course to animal rights. Mainly when people think about animal rights the only organization that comes to their mind is PETA. So people normally look to PETA first. The videos and information PETA provides are pretty shocking at first From there, either people decide these are only isolated incidents, or that they are going to turn away and not look and continue what they’re doing. Some decide to try and learn more though. They want to see if the things PETA says have any backing to them. Upon searching for these answers they can’t help but see that they do have backing to them. So anyone who thinks PETA is a stupid organization you agree with a lot of vegans. Try and look deeper than PETA though. Thu, 24 Apr 2008 00:55:12 -0400 http://statenews.com/index.php/comment/16457/view