Hypocrisy Among the Animal Rights” Activists

If that is true, and there has been no outcry on the part of PETA indicating the figures are false, it would place PETA at nearly three times the euthanasia rate of traditional animal shelters. These latter hover around the 34-percent mark throughout the group’s headquarters’ state of Virginia.

So, how does that calculate when one translates these stats into numbers of animals?

Here are the sad details. Out of the animals given to PETA for adoption, 12 made it to homes where the dog or cat will presumably live a rather healthy and happy life. How many didn’t achieve that status and instead were “put down”? Roughly 3,000.

But the icing on the proverbial cake comes in the manner in which PETA officials apparently operate, and in this instance, “operate” certainly doesn’t translate into any kind of compassion for their hapless four-legged charges.

According to press reports, PETA employees last year were convicted of using privately owned dumpsters in North Carolina (and no, PETA was not the owner of the dumpsters) to dispose of the dead bodies of the animals they had killed.

In addition, and in an unrelated incident, another PETA employee is facing felony charges in Virginia I a dog-napping case.

While it may seem that many unsuspecting people are often duped into digging deep into their collective pockets for donations to “help” helpless animals, what is so mind-boggling is how many politicians—supposedly the power-brokers and shakers—are aligned with PETA as well as similar organizations like Humane Society of the U.S.

The aligning of the two, animal-rights groups and politicians, is only confusing if you fail to make allowances for that same old bromide to which I’ve referred to I other columns: follow the money.

In 1993, the Doris Duke Foundation bequeathed the princely sum of $1 million to PETA. The group’s 2004 income tax statement indicated an income of $28,926,924 with expenditures of $25,063,060. The group clamed their end-of-the-year net worth was $11,479,793.

By the way that information comes to you courtesy of a group called the Center for Consumer Freedom, a watch-dog group tat keeps a necessary eye on a multitude of groups. The consumer-friendly group bird-dogs any and all entities in which public donations, political influence, or public safety is or could be an issue. In addition, that same group notes that 1995 income tax records for PETA indicate the group’s form 990 (donations to causes), lists of donation of $45,200 earmarked for the “support committee” of Rodney Coronado, who just happens to be convicted o federal charges of arson for the 1992 firebombing of a Michigan State University research laboratory.

Note to private donors: are causes such as support for a convicted felon what you had in mind when you dug deep into your wallet for PETA?

Currently, PETA lists its total revenues at more than $31 million, and its counterpart, the Humane Society of the United States, which lays claim to the dubious distinction of the richest” animal-rights organization in the world is even better off than PETA. In its 2006 financial statement, HSUS’s total revenue was more than $123 million with total assets worth more than $218 million.

If this extremist group nails a sufficient number of little old ladies and gents for a paltry $32 million in the next year or two, that group will be worth a quarter of a billion dollars.

And to make those donors out there a bit more apprehensive, in 2004 nor-retired president of HSUS, Paul Irwin, drew a modest salary of $500,000. That’s per year. In that same year, two executive vice presidents drew salaries of $195,000 and more than 10 state members made upwards of $100,000.

Nonetheless, s a famous politician once said (and I’m paraphrasing), “…a million here and a million there and pretty soon you’re talking about real money.”

It may be comparatively easy to understand how PETA or HSUS can con little old ladies out of $10. But how do they get supposedly savvy and sophisticated politicians on their respective bandwagons?

Case in point. According to USSA, at a so-called town meeting held January 16 of this year in Las Vegas, Barak Obama clearly expressed his support for animal rights. “I think how we treat our animals reflects how we treat each other, Obama reportedly said at the town meeting. “And it’s very important that we have a president who is mindful of the cruelty that is perpetrated on animals.”

Obama in the past has sponsored legislation that would prohibit the processing of horses for the purpose of producing horsemeat for pets in his home state of Illinois. Executive Vice president of HSUS and president of the Humane Society Legislative Fund, Michael Markarian, said Obama is “…a dedicated supporter of animal protection at state and federal levels.”

So, how did extremist groups like PETA and HSUS get Senator Obama to support them? See the section in this column that deals with the finances of these groups.

‘Nuff said?