I agree with everything you're saying here, but isn't it a little foolish to use Burger King as an example of companies that are more compassionate just because they don't work with circuses? That's kind of like saying that the nazi's weren't so bad because they sometimes didn't kill the blood haired jews...

Just my opinion.

Peace.

Posted by: Hitchjr | October 6, 2007 04:27 PM

I wont go there again. Their food always ways sucked anyways.

Posted by: Mary | October 6, 2007 04:58 PM

I'm not trying to "hate" on PETA, and I agree that animal abuse is terrible on so many levels. I would like to know however, how did you actually acquire these clips? Why is everything on the list disputed so strongly? Is it possible that your sources or what this "is" isn't as it seems? Is it possible, maybe, just maybe, that Ringling really does care about their animals, and a lot of these clips are just a once in a while thing, and that more often than not, they treat the animal as they claim? Is it possible that you're taking an extremist look at this,as if No one is right, especially people with elephants. No one.
Animal rights are something I believe in, yes. Extremist is something that I'm not. Try to take a realistic look at this. You took the absolute WORST clips, and compiled them into one. Those bullhooks that look like they could put a hole through your spine, are sizable equivalent as if being struck by a tooth hook. You know, the ones the dentist uses. That's pretty close to what an elephant would feel. Yeah, it's mildly unpleasent, but I'm pretty sure if the elephant were bothered by it, they would have kicked the lights out of the handler. It's a tiny prick to them, just enough to get their attention. I'm watching the clip again and it's really not as bad as you let it on to be.

Posted by: Benjamin Maisonet | October 7, 2007 01:11 AM

no matter what you say about denny's. iam still going to eat thier. who cares if denny's is sponsoring the circus. cause some companys don't see it your way. you peta people are calling to ban this company and that company. i think what you guys are doing is stuiped. animals where created to eat. keep as pets. for shows. and roam free. when you people acually have some worth while about aniamls instead of useing famous rich people i might just see it your way. all i see on your site is a lot of bitching and moaning about.

Posted by: Anonymous | October 7, 2007 01:42 AM

What is Denny's problem? They have such a bad image because of so many hateful things connected to them.

Now add this circus.

Denny's truly truly SUCKS.

Posted by: kelly | October 7, 2007 02:05 AM

Denny's known as a family-friendly restaurant?
A lot of us may recall from several years back, that one of Denny's chain restaurants caused them to have their own negative image with a nationally-publicized report due to refusing to serve people of color. And if I am not mistaken, a few of their other chains had some negative people-related incidents afterwards. Be he the same CEO throughout those incidents or one who is following in the footsteps of a previous CEO, then I am not surprised that the hard-core, ignorant Denny's CEO is refusing be co-operative to learn about the miserable lives of the animals in circuses.

Posted by: Ariel | October 7, 2007 11:46 AM

You are disgusting for supporting animal cruelty in circuses and I will never eat at your restaurant again until you stop your sponsorship of circuses.

Posted by: Chelsey | October 7, 2007 02:37 PM

To Benjamin Maisonet:
Did you somehow miss the entire point that Elephants should NOT be kept captive. EVER! They die at very young ages when they are not allowed to roam. They develop problems with their feet when they are forced to stay on concrete surfaces. The only place for any elephant is in the wild or at the very least a very large animal preserve.

Posted by: Cepheus | October 8, 2007 12:13 PM

Benjamin,

You don't even need to see a video clip to know it's wrong. Elephants cherish their freedom of movement just like you or me. They will walk 30 miles or more a day when they are in the wild. They are also highly social creatures and enjoy being in a large herd.

All these basic needs and instincts are stifled by the circus. Traveling from town to town, in what to them is a sardine-can-sized caravan, and having their freedom of movement severely restricted is de facto
animal cruelty. I can figure that one out without ever having to see a video.

Posted by: Mike Quinoa | October 8, 2007 12:22 PM

Anonymous

So don't come back on the PETA blog. You're another one who doesn't get it---THIS IS AN ANIMALS RIGHTS BLOG!!!! That means we don't use them for our purposes: eat them, wear them, abuse them, force them to perform stupid tricks for stupid people like you who don't get it. Boycott is reasonable, just like the Mohandas and MLK JR did in their respective justice movements. Your comments are simply ignorant; go blog on sites that agree with you. There exist millions of anti-animal sites. Go there and enjoy and share your hatred with them.

Posted by: Ana | October 8, 2007 01:46 PM

I went to the circus once when I was a kid. I didn't find it that amusing. So, would the PETA people have an issue if they stopped using the elephants? Or are horses, lions, and tigers also bad to use? And if so, would those two guys who have the tigers in Vegas also be bad news? And if they go that far am I a horrible person for owning my cat, Pete?
I'm not advocating Ringling Bro's (or Denny's for that matter). I'm not a fan of either, but I like to think that my cat lives a better life in my care than in the wild. Granted i don't make Pete do stupid tricks and he roams free. He comes and goes of his own choosing. So does that make me a bad person. Again, I'm just curious where you guys stand on this.

Posted by: chuck garcia | October 8, 2007 03:51 PM

shut it "Mary"! Peta is doing a damn well good job of opening up secrets and lies of companys and business like Dennys! PFT! I hate them! Peta works hard at making a better life of animals.. if they don't do it who will? YOU!? I dont think so. They need support, and not have it backfired in there face! to all you haters, your wasting your sad time.. You hate Peta, good.. because it will only make them work harder!!

Posted by: Liz | October 8, 2007 06:46 PM

Hi, chuck garcia, : )
You already have the answers to your questions - within your own VERY compassionate heart - just from the one time you went to the circus when you were a kid - because as you said, that you didn't find it amusing...and also with your awareness of the tigers being held in captivity doing stupid tricks.
Yes, all of those animals are wrongfully exploited and none of it is acceptable. However, with you treating Pete with the respect that he deserves, all together, I think you are a very special person!

Posted by: Ariel | October 8, 2007 07:41 PM

Denny's food is crap anyway. To be so uncaring towards animals is deplorable.
I think it's funny that posters like Anonymous can't even spell. Perhaps you should be attending school instead of spouting off ignorant comments.

Posted by: Cathleen | October 8, 2007 07:55 PM

Chuck,

You hit the nail on the head in your second paragraph...you don't force Pete to perform for the masses. Pete actually would NOT be better off in the wild; because he's a domesticated cat, he will have a much longer life if protected in your home, with lots of toys to keep him interested (and even LONGER if he's been fixed...you DID get him fixed, right Chuck?). If he was let outside, he would fall prey to traffic, predators such as stray dogs, unfixed toms, or worse yet people with nefarious purposes in mind (Halloween pranks, vivisection, dogfighting bait, etc.).

As far as other circus animals, PETA believes NO wild animals, such as tigers, horses, lions, etc. should be used, forced or coerced into entertaining people. That goes for Siegfried & Roy (the Vegas guys) as well. Cirque de Soleil has proven for many years now that circuses can be entertaining AND cruelty-free. I encourage you to check out the rest of the PETA site, specifically helpinganimals.com and circuses.com.

Give Pete an ear scratch for me!

Posted by: BullyDawg | October 9, 2007 12:53 PM

Benjamin Maisonet, are you gullible and naive, or just stupid?

People who WORK for Ringling Brothers have come forward to talk about the abuse and suffering.

And Ringling Brothers just sued to keep evidence of the elephant torture out of court (they lost.)

This is how animal abuse goes on- people like Benjamin Maisonet that believe rich corporations and their fairy tales.

Posted by: kelly | October 9, 2007 02:41 PM

I won't say that I am quite as gung-ho as PETA with animal rights but I do take care of my dog Lily, who I rescused from a shelter, and who probably wouldn't do a trick even if I tried. But I was just curious about something Bullydawg said: "you DID get him fixed, right Chuck?. Now my Lily was fixed when I got her, and it was recommended and later required by the humane society that it happen. My question lies in the fact that wouldn't getting a pet fixed be a form of animal cruelty, even if it helps them live longer? It has to be at least a little painful, and it isn't like they are being given a choice. Pet owners just do it, for a variety of reasons, including life expectancy. I mean we don't go into nursing homes and start messing with grandpa's "equipment" because we find out it will help him live longer. That seems a bit selfish to me. And to anyone that might not like my tangent I apologize. I am not a regular blogger but this was just something curious to me and I wanted to get some possible comments from others.

Posted by: Lindsey | October 9, 2007 09:04 PM

Hopefully Denny's opens its eyes and realizes that aligning itself with Ringling will only bring it more unwanted negative publicity!

Posted by: V. Soto | October 10, 2007 03:37 PM

Hi, Lindsey, : )
I'm REALLY glad that you asked input about spay/neutering.
The surgeries are done with having the utmost concern and senstivity for the animals. They are gently anesthesized, closely monitored upon awakening, and given antibiotics to prevent infections, we are given instructions for care at home. The instruments and other surgical supplies used are sterile. And actually, they bounce back a LOT faster than we do from surgeries!
I wouldn't really say that spay/neutering helps them live longer because no one can really predict the life expectancy or future diagnoses with human animals or animals. But I think that connection developed long ago because with spay/neutering, the animals were a lot less inclined to roam and wander during mating seasons - so they fortunately had less opportunities to be terribly harmed or killed.
But nowadays that pets - especially cats kept indoors - are more protected because of leash laws,etc., it would be very, very uncomfortable for them (almost inhumane practically), to have them endure those hormonal urges (which is often), and they will keep trying to escape. If they do, they could get hit by a car.

So the humane purpose of spay/neutering - no cruelty whatsoever - is to prevent the amount of unwanted puppies, kittens, rabbits, etc., because they are either abandoned, taken to shelters, and if not adopted, they are euthanized. Thousands of unwanted loving dogs and cats are euthanized every day in shelters across the country. Some are given away "free to good homes." Well, that doesn't guarantee that the taker isn't going to use those kittens/puppies as baits for training dogs to be cruel for dogfighting, or that some lab isn't going to take them for excruciatingly painful lab experiments, or that the taker isn't an animal abuser.
If they are cruelly abandoned -especially without having been spayed/neutered- then a more terrible cycle continues. I have never come across any liters of puppies from an abandoned female, but I definitely deal with feral cats, who were kittens born from abandoned cats. Feral cats live horrible lives that end up being short because of so many terrible reasons, but meantime, they have liters of kittens - and the cycle continues. So I humanely trap them, have them tested, vaccinated, spay/neutered, and keep them. I was fortunate enough to capture a few kittens so I could socialize them early enough not to be feral. Now, all of them live in health and safety - and the kittens grew to become spoiled brats! : )
As I always say: I'm not dripping in diamonds, but I am covered with furs! : ) (they gather on and around me to be petted when I sit on my couch)

Posted by: Ariel | October 10, 2007 11:29 PM

Hey, Lindsey.

I am sure Lily is very lucky to have you.

I don't think you went on a tangent; I think you asked a reasonable question.

Undoubtedly, animals feel pain when they are spayed or neutered. I make sure animals I rescue have pain medication and lots of attention afterward, but I know they feel pain.

We can use my dog, Chica, as an example. Had she not been spayed, Chica could conceivably have had two litters a year for each of her nine years on earth. Belgians tend to have large litters (up to 12), so let's be conservative and say each litter had five puppies.

That's 90 puppies over 9 years to find good homes for, and for each of those 90 puppies, one more shelter dog may have been killed because he wasn't adopted.

Now imagine that half of the 90 puppies were female and not spayed, and each of them had 90 puppies. So far, that's 3,650 puppies born because Chica wasn't spayed (if my math is right - it's late).

Those puppies will grow up and most likely go on to have more puppies. Therefore, fewer shelter dogs will be adopted, and the unwanted dog population will increase, leading to more dogs being put down for want of owners.

Because Chica and Lily are spayed, and because they are both adopted shelter dogs, we have done a tremendous amount to prevent suffering and death for many dogs to come.

To me, having Chica go through the surgery that she recovered from quickly is a small price to pay to become part of the solution to animal overpopulation. She can't speak and decide for herself, so it's my job as her caretaker to make the most responsible decisions I can on her behalf.

That's how I think of it.

Again, thanks for posting. Give Lily a big pat for me, and I hope to see you on the blogs!

Posted by: Corndog | October 11, 2007 06:37 AM

To Kelly---

I am none of the above.

If this is truly going on, I am terribly sorry for the animals. The problem is seperating fact from fiction. I need to see it for myself. My own two eyes. That's the kind of person I am.
I'm not naive, I'm uninformed. I'm not gullible because I don't believe either side of the argument. Ringing exaggerates the way they "taker care" of their animals, PETA exaggerates how they don't. It's a tug-o-war that can only be argued by each individual seeing it for themselves. Have you personally gone and seen the elephants being abused?

Posted by: Benjamin Maisonet | October 25, 2007 07:07 AM

If I may also say, how strong and fully bias PETA is. They don't leave much room for interpretation, or self examination. They just tell you how they feel.

"Denny’s jumps into bed with the animal abusing freak show"

"apparently Marchioli is OK with the beatings, neglect, confinement, and death"

"Nelson Marchioli refused to even talk with us about the issue"

Who are they to say what he thinks just because he had no comment? If you ask me if I'm gay, and I don't answer, does that make me a queer, a rapist, and a child molester.

Posted by: Benjamin Maisonet | October 25, 2007 07:12 AM

Benjamin, you do not need to SEE the animals in their cages or chained up to know that they are held in captivity.

You do not need to SEE the animals in buses/trucks/trains to know that they had to get transported from city to city somehow. Obviously these are not luxury accommodations for elephants who normally roam over 30 miles per day in their natural habitat.

You do not need to SEE the handlers using bullhooks to know that the animals are being harmed - animals do not ride bicycles because they feel like it. They do it because they have learned that if they don't, they will feel pain.

You do not need to "personally" SEE the animals being abused (yeah, as if Ringling Bros. are going to roll out the red carpet for that!), because you can watch video footage from people who have managed to do undercover investigations.

Your statement about needing to see things for yourself is just ridiculous. Do you therefore not believe the atrocities of the Nazi holocaust because you were not there to SEE it??? Do you disbelieve the research saying that cigarette smoking causes cancer because you cannot actually see the cancer with your own two eyes??? That is just nonsense - you are deliberately keeping those blinders on when it comes to circuses with animal acts. Shame on you!

Posted by: Michele | October 26, 2007 10:38 AM

Don't ban Dennys, destroy the circus using ACTION (RATATATATATATATATATATATA) instead of useless protests that only make people ignorant.

Posted by: Mr. Chief | October 26, 2007 10:59 PM

I had cancer thank you. So I do belive it.

I DO need to SEE the abuse. How do you know they are giving them bullhooks. It's not ridiculous. There's more than one way to train an animal. I train my dogs by giving them treats for doing good, not beating them for doing bad. Who are you to say they don't do the same with elephants. You say what you have seen in this video is true, even though you have no physical evidence to back it up. Go find the elephant for yourself.

I'm not saying it's not true at least to some extent. I never said that. I said I think it's being exaggerated by the PETA.

I think that there is a lot more ethical treatment then they let on. And they hardball a whole company for two or three people for their screw ups. Fire them, don't shut down a company.

Luxury accomodations??? And I suppose my 86 jalopy mustang is much better right? Talk about a sardine can. I've driven that thing hundreds of miles in 100 degree wether with no air conditioning. Who are you to say they deserve luxury accomidations? What you want them to have a double decker bus with jacuzzi's? Let's be real here. They are comfortable enough. At least in the hot wether they're moving fast enough on the highway to get some wind blown in their face. My car barely push's 65. Hell buy me a car. People for the Ethical Treatment of Benjamin. And what have you got to say now?

Posted by: Benjamin Maisonet | October 27, 2007 08:06 PM