As if kevin federline would really be a good pet owner... This publicity stunt was very highly criticized by TMZ bloggers. A Defeat for PETA, who could take those two seriously?

Posted by: Mary | October 5, 2007 02:16 PM

Way to use a guy's kids. C'mon now, that's not right. Apply pressure to psycho Brit, that's fine- but leave that man's babies out of it!

Posted by: J | October 5, 2007 02:34 PM

Ingrid and PETA are the best! The dogs should definitely stay with the boys - they have become attached to them now and that family bond should never be broken apart.

Posted by: Joan Ozelis Calpin | October 5, 2007 03:31 PM

Ingrid and PETA are the best! The dogs should definitely stay with the boys - they have become attached to them now and that family bond should never be broken apart.

Posted by: Joan Ozelis Calpin | October 5, 2007 03:31 PM

If anyone wants to see the kinds of places that Britney's pet store and ALL the other pet stores buy their puppies from, check out http://www.prisonersofgreed.org

A lot of them lie about it, but all these pet store puppies come from puppy mills.

ALSO the puppies sold through internet sites. They ship the puppy to you because they don't want you to see the horrific kennels!

Also most of the puppies sold through the classifieds (they pretend to be private breeders) and all the puppies sold in flea markets and roadside.

Posted by: kelly | October 5, 2007 03:48 PM

This is why people don't take PETA seriously. Hell, I don't half the time.

Posted by: Melissa | October 5, 2007 03:55 PM

Give me a break why does everyone want to keep dragging this girl down! so what she take her dogs around with her who cares? So do a lot of stars so do regular people. Im sure there are other animals that could use your involvement. the dogs dont belong to that unemployed looser so I dont think he could take them plus he couldnt get child support for dogs so Im sure he wouldnt be interested. Get real!

Posted by: JEN | October 5, 2007 03:56 PM

I don't think she should be allowed to have her dogs or any pet for that matter. She can't take care of herself or her own children let alone a poor animal. Somebody needs to step in and save them as well and soon!

Posted by: Missy | October 5, 2007 04:01 PM

You are so way off here.
Many magazines have talked about how much K-Fed dislikes dogs.
Two magazines are still asking where the little dog went when K-Fed moved back in. He HATES dogs, do you get it.
That dog has never been found.
And this guy walks everywhere
in his MANY FUR COATS.
you are so wrong THIS TIME.
What in Gods name is wrong with you???????????????

Posted by: Judith, Freedom Fighter | October 5, 2007 04:21 PM

Can you just leave Britney alone? Those dogs are more atached to her than they are to the kids. If you are a smart person you would know that dogs hide from small children after a while because children play with them like they were a toy and they hurt animals.

Posted by: Erika | October 5, 2007 04:23 PM

I'm actually surprised that you guys would take such a reputable org. like PETA and have them stand behind such a ridiculous letter when this is such a sensitive subject. It seems immature & alomost like "mocking" a very serious & sensitive subject. I am very dissapointed as I have been an avid Peta supporter, it seems you guys have made yourself look like a joke. Your cause was seriously misguided here.

Posted by: Maribel | October 5, 2007 04:27 PM

Dear Peta, You have recieved my last donation. You have NO proof Ms Spears mistreats her pets. I"m sure with all her money they were well taken care of... It's one thing to go after Michael Vicks its another just to throw stones!

Posted by: ljcallahan | October 5, 2007 04:31 PM

Man...

Britney's State is so pathethic right now that you're asking K-Fed for help.

Posted by: Ray-O | October 5, 2007 05:20 PM

You have to be kidding me! No court is going to grant custody of the dogs to K-fed. That's the most stupid thing I have ever heard. She's made some mistakes, and she is trying to turn her life around. Do everybody a favor and get over it. So she wears fur and eats meat; so does 80% of Hollywood. Move on and get off everybodies case!!!

Posted by: Alana | October 5, 2007 05:23 PM

entrusting little dogs with little children for any reason... are you sure?!

is Kevin any more caring about animals than Britney... do you know?!

Posted by: 007 | October 5, 2007 05:38 PM

Ive always thought PETA did good things and, and although I didnt always agree with everything you did, I knew in the long run, it was for the best.
Now you've went too far. To kick someone when they are down is showing that you are nothing but a bully and only wanting to get your name in the news. By jumping on the kick britney wagon, you've actually did more hurt to your organization than to help it. Im sure you will see more fallout from this stronger than my comments,and I look forward to seeing it.
How in the world you would think anyway that her dogs would be better off in Fedex's hands than hers, shows just how out of touch you are, and how blind you can become when in the quest of publicity. Shame on you.

Posted by: John | October 5, 2007 05:49 PM

God Bless You Ingrid and the PETA team for all that you have done and continue to do for amimals all over the world. I will never regret supporting you and what your organization stands for.

Posted by: Nat | October 5, 2007 06:14 PM

God Bless You Ingrid and the PETA team for all that you have done and continue to do for amimals all over the world. I will never regret supporting you and what your organization stands for.

Posted by: Nat | October 5, 2007 06:15 PM

Ingrid,
Seriously your acticually suggesting that the court take away Briteny pets.. Why?? Just because there seen out with her doesnt mean that shes abusive to them where your evidence dont you think shes been through enough already?? I listend to you call on ABC this morning and you Ingrid have no evidence or proof that Britney is abusive what so ever. Let her have her dogs because right now thats really all she has and her sons are young enough to bounce back from this, I've worked with children for many many years and when there very young they dont get attached like we as adults do.

Look just leave Briteny alone!! I just think that your orginaztion is after her money, thats what everyone wants is her money just leave her and her animals the hell alone!!!
Thank You

Posted by: Amanda | October 5, 2007 07:43 PM

That interview was not a good idea lady!!! My god, who In the world told you to do that. Please FIRE THEM.... You want to be noticed, please don't use BS, who is in the news {Love you girl} to get your voice on the news. I think Im going to up chuck right now.

Posted by: patty bunce | October 5, 2007 08:06 PM

What an ignorant suggestion that KFED have the tiny children around the tiny fragile Yorkshire terrier. That poor dog could be injured, squeezed to death, stepped on and God only knows what with a tiny baby playing with it. Most breeders that I have talked with do not allow purchases of tiny dogs by families with small children!

Posted by: Shelley Vincent | October 5, 2007 08:22 PM

Enough is enough !!! PETA's contact with Michael Vick and K-Fed is done for only one purpose - to get PETA's name in the news. This latest media hype goes directly to the addage "There is no such thing as bad publicity".

If PETA's primary goal is to stay in the news, at all costs, I guess the MV and K-Fed contacts make sense. However, if PETA exercised any level of INTEGRITY towards it's advertised "ethical treatment of animals" purpose, there would be absolutley no media hype such as this.

How many animals rights groups, animal perserves, rescue groups, etc. are there in the United States that do nothing but positive, ethical advertising and educating to further their causes ? Unfortunately, PETA continues to show itself as nothing more than a radical group willing to say or do anything (in many cases against it's own cause) to simply stay in the media and feed the egos of it's leadership and "celebrity" spokespeople.

ALL READERS, please consider where your donations can best be used to protect animals. I think there are many legitimate causes and organizations today, and PETA's self-serving agenda disqualifies itself in my book. If you read this and other blogs for PETA, there are many, many "members" and contributors voicing opposition to these latest media stunts.

PETA, THINK - are you really speaking for the majority of your members and contributors, or acting like any other self-serving egotists who can't help themselves !!!

Posted by: Wayne | October 5, 2007 09:28 PM

The fact that judith knows this dork's views on dogs makes me laugh so hard I want to vomit up the salmon I had for supper. Thank goodness she's a freedom fighter. I pretty sure the world will come to an end if Britney Spears gets to keep her dogs, but I must admit, I am not as up to date as Judith on this hot button issue.

Posted by: Christopher Cochran MD | October 5, 2007 09:48 PM

I think it's pathetic and disgusting that PETA is jumping on the Britany train to draw attention to themselves. As if having her kids taken away wasn't lesson enough. I've never seen her dogs endangered on camera in a way that would justify PETA now bringing the troubled pop star under attack. This is just a ploy for PETA to get in on the action. As an organization with a conscious, PETA is not taking responsibility for the harm it is potentially inflicting on a person that is in poor mental health. Her dogs are probably the only support she has. As someone that has given money to PETA for the last few years, I am becoming increasingly disgusted by your ways. I recommend you leave this one alone....

Posted by: Ruben M. | October 5, 2007 11:25 PM

This is one of the dumbest and lowest things I've ever seen PETA do for publicity. Huge mistake and extremely disappointing.

Posted by: Alex Mancias | October 5, 2007 11:31 PM

leave britney alone!!!!!
you people are so annoying. why dont you go and give some of your attention to other animals that truly need it. do you honestly think this is the most important thing right now. i think your just trying to get some publicity out of the britney spears thing. get over it!!!!!!

Posted by: danielle | October 5, 2007 11:43 PM

This is a between-a-rock-and-a-hard-spot situation. Yorkies, chihuahuas, and other tiny dogs are actually not suitable for little children. They are at risk for being hurt in a household with kids of the pre-rational, pre-empathetic age. The smaller the dog, the more delicate - far more delicate than a cat of similar size. These dogs are for careful, knowledgeable adults who know how to provide a safe environment for them.

In my household, we have had a Yorkie rescued from a household in which a child had accidentally killed another Yorkie; my housemate took the surviving dog home with him. This Yorkie lived to be fifteen years old, extreme old age for a Yorkie, but he never got over his nervousness of kids.

Posted by: Laura Argiri | October 6, 2007 12:15 AM

i think peta going after the dogs is the most ridiculous thing i have ever heard. i am a big supporter of peta and most everything they do. but i think that this is just a publicity stunt, a way to get their name out there more. i know that britney may not be a fit mother or pet owner, but for peta to attack her on her abilities, especially when few people know her on a first hand and personal basis, is wrong, and in my opinion, as immoral is the ill treatment of animals. but hey what do i know? i dont know how britney treats her dogs, but i have a feeling neither does Ingrid Newkirk.

Posted by: Joel | October 6, 2007 01:38 AM

The humane society is where I get my news on these subjects.
And please don't throw up.
old men like yourself start throwing up and not only food comes with it but your teeth also,YUK.
I researched you, you have been a very bad Dr. You were kicked out of texas for many not nice reasons.There were 12 on that list.
I have been told you are now in Missouri. You are the worst kind of Dr there is.
You can no longer practice medicine. LOSER, I knew it.

Posted by: Judith, Freedom Fighter | October 6, 2007 02:25 PM

PETA is just trying to make sure that the dogs are gonna be taken care of, Britney leads a destructive lifestyle, just cause she has money does not mean she takes care of her dogs, With Britney acting like a total lunatic, the custody battle with the kids, the dogs could easily be forgotten in this mess. Lay off bashing PETA, their just making sure that the dogs are taken care of

Posted by: carolyn | October 6, 2007 03:53 PM

I believe Brit-Brit also bought a parakeet on one of her little pet shop visits...

You should not have specified dogs only, although I would not be surprised if the bird were dead already.

Posted by: Tamara | October 6, 2007 04:07 PM

Ok, first of all the SPCA made it public that the case of the pup with the fractured leg was already closed. In fact it was an open/shut case. Britney proved that she took the necessary steps to care for the pup.

I think that this is PETA trying to get attention to boost themselves. They are taking advantage of the situation that Britney is in and they should be ashamed of themselves. They have NO proof that Britney is not taking care of the animals.

And also, Kevin doesn't give a lick about the puppys or probably even the kids for that matter. They are nothing more than dollar signs to him.

Posted by: Crystal | October 6, 2007 09:24 PM

I am very disappointed in this. I heard this on the news and I thought it was a lie. I am disappointed that I donated money to PETA now. I have been very impressed with the issues PETA has been fighting for but writing this letter to K-Fed is totally ridiculous. PETA, spend your time on issues that matter like you have been. This totally crosses for me. I'm still shaking my head.

Posted by: Shelley | October 6, 2007 10:11 PM

To: the so-called PeTA supporters(?) who claim they are withdrawing because of Britney Spears, etc.
Questions:
1. Is ANIMAL RIGHTS' about supporting the animals, OR is it about supporting Britney?
2. Is ANIMAL RIGHTS' totally about helping the animals, OR is it about what pleases and displeases YOU?(talk about self-serving!)

Well, when you donate to other "animal" orgs., please donate a LOT of money and don't withdraw when you find out some trivial things like:
-your donation will go towards supporting the lavish lifesytles of the CEOs who make a HUGE six-figure salary, as well as your donation will contribute to the CEOs extended wealthy panel, and to other "important" friviolities instead of them spending it on publicized animal campaigns.
-don't withdraw when you find out that some of those "animal" orgs. are financially supported by highly-influential, wealthy ANTI-ANIMAL campaigners who have an agenda against animal rights'/animal welfare, and that the CEOs, etc., know about them, but keep them hidden from members.
-don't withdraw if you learn the difference between animal rights' and animal welfare orgs.
-please don't get upset when it finally hits you that Britney does things for publicity! Shocking! to get money, and perhaps not even once cent of it goes towards helping animals.
-and above all, please, don't any of you get upset when you find out that Britney doesn't even know that you exist.

Posted by: Ariel | October 7, 2007 01:22 PM

BTW can I just add...why all the ridicule about PETA being concerned for Brit-Brit's dogs.

Uh, people. That's what PETA does...takes care of animals.

Ok, she wasn't dog-fighting them like Michael Vick.

But does what she did or didn't do(like allegedly not get vet care) with the dogs just as important?

You can't discriminate on the size of the dog. I guess that's what's going on.

I don't get it.I am glad PETA is concerned.

Posted by: Tamara | October 7, 2007 01:39 PM

now this is crazy. hes not after those dogs or kids hes after MONEY. How would we look under a spotlight? NOT TOO GOOD. WRONG MOVE PETA.

Posted by: Christel Austin | October 7, 2007 02:32 PM

See, it is retarded actions like these that make people think PETA is crazy. This is ridiculous.

Posted by: Bryant | October 7, 2007 02:45 PM

Wait...is Brit gonna have to pay pet support if Kfed gets the dogs??
Otherwise I dont c why someone like Kfed would want those pups unless they came with a nice sum of money.
Just like the kids!!!

Posted by: alisa | October 7, 2007 05:50 PM

This is a joke. Unless you know what Britney is doing to her dogs you don't know anything. And for what is going on in her life right now Britney doesn't need this crap!

If Peta wants to make anyone's life a living hell and who really deserve it it's Michael "Dog Killing" Vick and not Britney Spears!

Posted by: Diana Struve | October 7, 2007 07:35 PM

Michael "Dog Killing" Vick is more GUILTY of harming an animal than Britney Spears!

Posted by: Diana Struve | October 7, 2007 07:41 PM

I would personally like to apologize to britany spears on behalf of these headline grabbers!!!! peta u have just destroyed your own reputations!!!! i cannot in good conscience support an organization that could be that publicly pety! if this is what they can do in front of the camera....what goes on behind it????

Posted by: vivian | October 8, 2007 04:06 AM

I know Britney Spears has been a horrible mother AND pet owner, but we still have to remember for the longest time we thought k-fed was a bad influence for the kids and now that Britney has gone crazy he automatically looks like the "better" parent. Whats going to happen when K-fed messes up then is Britney going to be the better parent and pet owner?

Posted by: Paul | October 8, 2007 09:44 AM

Where the fuck are all these "Leave Britney alone" people coming from? Don't you guys have Algebra homework to do or something?

Posted by: Geoff | October 8, 2007 10:06 AM

Judith,

It sounds like you are about as good at research as PETA is. I have never lived or practiced in Texas. I am not old. (well for a dog, I am) I have never had my license censured in any way. I am still practicing. I am very successful. My teeth are all my own. I do work in Missouri, but I don't live there. That's all you got right. Keep fighting for freedom!

Posted by: Christopher Cochran MD | October 8, 2007 11:28 AM

Everyone knows how cruel kids can be to animals! They are horrible with small dogs! No wonder his poor foot got broken! I say put em up for adoption! I'll adopt one! Neither one needs them!

Posted by: Jami | October 8, 2007 12:27 PM

"And for what's going on in her life right now Britney doesn't need this crap!"

PeTA is "headline grabbers." (redundant comments)

Interesting concepts.
I would like the above commenters to convince me of all or any of the following:
1. Britney has absolutely no control over her life, so all the bad incidents were thrust upon her against her will; and she couldn't seek guidance because no one would give her any. So she can't be held responsible for anything that goes on her life.
2. Britney totally shuns any and all headlines and publicity because she prefers to remain an anonymous celebrity. She has,however, publicly expressed outrage for all the noteriety in her life.
3. PeTA, on the other hand and unlike Britney, practically monopolizes all types of media coverage repeatedly.
Now, anyone might ask: what do my comments have to do with animal rights?
Answer: nothing particular directly. But only to prove that the above types of anti-animal/PeTA commenters do not merit validity.

Posted by: Ariel | October 8, 2007 01:10 PM

Even though it may be strange or silly that a letter was written to K-Fed to take custody of the dogs, there is something to be said about people who can't even take care of themselves.

The real issue here is the children and the dogs and their well being. With that being said, I firmly believe that neither Brittany nor K-Fed are mature enough to take care of the kids and the dogs.

It scares me to think that just anybody can have a baby or adopt an animal. It is said that you need to have a license to drive a car; you need to go to school to be trained in a field; however, the most important and difficult job in the world (that being a parent or guardian) does not require any training or a license. Now add Hollywood and young celebrities to the mix and you've got a disaster waiting to happen.

Now I'm not saying that all people are bad parents nor am I saying that all those in Hollywood are unsuitable, but the signs were clear before conception (as this relates to Brittany's behavior).

Who really knows what goes on behind closed doors. There have been reports of animal abuse, but we don't know for sure. However, if people can't take care of their kids properly what makes you think they can take care of animals. On the flipside, people who can't take care of their animals should never have kids.

So, Ingrid is half right. The dogs should also be removed from Brittany's care, but should not go to K-Fed, but to responsible family members, as well as the children.

Anyone who takes offense to these comments should look at the world's events and the patterns that follow.

I understand that nobody is perfect and everybody is doing the best they can until they know better, but I personally believe that people should look at themselves before reproducing. I, for one, am not a parent and currently am without a companion animal (I used to be the father of a beautiful cat, who was emotionally affected by the fighting between myself and my ex-wife) only because I'm working out my own issues. I don't feel it's fair to subject a child or an animal to our baggage.

It's fair to say that the domestication of animals was a mistake considering the fact that we are not evolved enough to be at peace with ourselves - a peace we can share with our companion animals - to bring one into a home with unresolved issues is not fair to those who enter.

If anything Ingrid has put out a message that if we have issues to deal with, we should free ourselves of any responsibility to another, in order to heal properly. This is why the children have been taken. Why not give the dogs the same consideration.

But to go to K-Fed. I don't know. Maybe, he'll do a good job with the kids and the dogs, however, he should be watched. I'm just not convinced ... yet.

EAS

Posted by: EAS | October 8, 2007 01:53 PM

DR.
I'm right I am always right.
Not a doubt in my mind.
:)

Posted by: Judith, Freedom Fighter | October 8, 2007 02:26 PM

Seems to me the general consensus here is that you screwed up bad with that letter. Im sure peta can use all the donations it gets from animal lovers, but maybe, just maybe, you wont get as many now because of your stupid letter to kfed.
Serves you right for getting into something that was none of your business. I believe in what PETA stands for, but not for this. No longer will I take up for peta.

Posted by: John | October 8, 2007 03:07 PM

lj Callahan, Shelley, and John, you guys win the prize today as the morons who made a variation on the old "this is my last donation to Peta" comment.

Congratulations for being a bunch of alarmist idiots. A short letter to Kevin Federline was all it took to shake your hitherto unwavering faith in Peta's work to protect animals. You stuck around through all the hard times at the beginning when Peta was a tiny group with an unpopular message of compassion for animals. You bore with them through the controversial demonstrations and investigations. You stood by during the tough times when the media turned against them. But now, finally, Peta have gone over the edge. Off the fucking deep end. A ... letter ... to K-Fed!!! Oh, the humanity. How could Peta have betrayed you like this? Such callousness. Such cruel disregard for all that is precious in this world.

Oh, wait. My bad. It was actually just a fucking letter to K-Fed. Get off your high horses, you first-class douchebags.

Posted by: Geoff | October 8, 2007 03:49 PM

Judith,
If you can prove I have ever lived or practiced in TX or ever lost my license I will kiss your ass on main street and give you a week to draw a crowd. You are the perfect ambassador for PETA. Half cocked. Poorly Spoken. Ill Advised.

Have a great day.

Posted by: Christopher Cochran MD | October 8, 2007 04:50 PM

Maybe one solution would be to award custody of children AND dogs to Britney's mother while Britney is recovering?
I wouldn't know. I don't know any of these people or how good their parenting skills are, for kids OR dogs.

Posted by: Susannah S | October 8, 2007 05:33 PM

Dr.
I shall no longer say anything more about you.
Shame on you.
Shame on you. I only hope that your God can forgive you.

Peace

Posted by: Judith, Freedom Fighter | October 8, 2007 09:45 PM

Bravo, Geoff! : )

Judith, Freedom Fighter,
My, my, Dr. Faux is in quite a dither! Seems like he needs to pop a couple of Valium. : )
IF he is a real doctor, ironically, just with his last comments to you, it can be truthfully said about him: "Half cocked. Poorly spoken. Ill advised."
Oh his poor "patients!"

Posted by: Ariel | October 8, 2007 09:54 PM

The fact that PETA is basing their decision to attack Britney Spears purely off of personal judgement is proof enough that this is a publicity stunt. There is no substantiating evidence of animal abuse that would justify this attack. The judges ruling to take Britney's kids away was based on her not making scheduled appearances and not submitting to drugs testing. If PETA wants to start attacking all "dog owning" celebrities that party, go out at night, enjoy flashing the Paparazzi with their va-jay-jays, and supposedly do drugs (no direct proof), then they have a loooonnnggg list to start working on. Have Fun!!
And how anyone can compare Britney to Mike Vick is completely beyond me. How many dead dogs were found on his property? How many mauled dogs were found alive? How much illegal "dog-fighting" equipment was found on his property? Where is the mounting evidence against Britney? The only thing I've ever witnessed her do with her dogs is carry them in her arm as an accessory. Not sure that's a crime but it looks retarded. Like she's just being trendy. I still think this is a huge publicity stunt and a low blow from PETA. Completely stupid

Posted by: Alexi | October 8, 2007 10:47 PM

It's wrong to mistreat animals but ok to use someones children to get what you want!
This proves Peta Lies to get what they want.
No more Peta 2008..

Posted by: Beth | October 8, 2007 11:47 PM

geoff, are you getting enough iron in your diet?

Posted by: rojo | October 9, 2007 09:56 AM

I would rather see these poor dogs up for adoption on petfiner, or with a rescue organization than with Britney, or K-Fed and the kids. I totally agree with those of you who have said that kids are terrible with animals, especially little dogs like this! PETA was definitely wrong this time, but everyone makes mistakes and I am still a strong supporter of the organization. PETA has definitely had more victories than mistakes and I'm thankful to them for all of the positive things that they do.
PS. K-Fef would be a HORRIBLE pet owner, and I guarantee that he fails as a parent. He is just as irresonsible as Britney, they should've never had the poor kids in the first place!

Posted by: kate | October 9, 2007 10:47 AM

LOL Geooooffff.
Take a good look in the mirror, you slacker, and you will really see a moron douchebag. Damn right it pissed me off. It wasnt just a letter nimrod, it was a televised, publicized, much advertised ploy to get publicity for peta. Had nothing to do with the dogs,just to get Ingrid's face on all the newschannels and papers. And hey, it worked, but at what cost?
And look what else it did. It brought out little minded slackers like you to come here and call people names. I can tell you this much Geoooffff. You definitely wouldn't speak that way to my face. Now go eat a damn cheeseburger and shut the heck up. Slacker.

Posted by: John | October 9, 2007 11:10 AM

The law states that dogs are personal property. The Yorkie London was purchased AFTER Brit and Kevin separated and just before the divorce was finalized. He has no more claim to London than to any other property she bought after the split - like a new house.
BEsides, everyone knows Yorkie/CHihuahuas should NOT be owned by people with small children in the house - too much of a likelihood of injury to the dog. Maybe one of the kids fell or stepped on London? PETA - lay off K Fed - he has no legal claim to the dog.

Posted by: Kara | October 9, 2007 12:52 PM

And where IS the little white Chihuahua Britney and Kev bought right after their wedding (when she was pregnant with the first kid)????????

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

I don't care for Britney Spears and wish I didn't know anything about her life, but alas. I want to say, though, that I think Peta needs to rethink its publicity stunts. Some are just stupid and turn off people who care about animals. If Britney were to lose custody of her dogs (which I seriously doubt will happen), she'll turn around and buy more puppymill puppies. Is that what we want?

Posted by: Tracy | October 9, 2007 05:18 PM

Ok, talking about publicity stunts.
Can someone please tell me who had her hair buzzed off in a PUBLIC beauty salon (and someone with a photo camera just happened to be there at the exact same time taking a number of pictures)?
Can someone tell me why that person didn't have her hair buzzed off in the PRIVACY of her own home, by employing a hairdresser?
And can someone tell me why that person who had her hair buzzed off did not express any outrage about it being publicized ad nauseum?

Posted by: Ariel | October 9, 2007 08:08 PM

My Dear Ariel,
Do you feel that also?
You are very smart my dear.
He is a sad, sad man.
He needs to find friends elsewhere.
He should be ashamed of himself, I wonder how long it takes him to post on this board?
He must sleep with a Dictionary under his little pillow. I almost feel sorry for him but not quite...He needs to find a new group of people who he can terrorize,
because we no longer give a crap. We just laugh.
I so hope that, that shall bring him some happiness.

Kara, The little white pup is still missing, but many people are out looking for her.
Let's hope they find her.
We will stay the faith.
Judith

All Beings Tremble before Violence
All Fear Death
All Love Life

The Buddha

Posted by: Judith, Freedom Fighter | October 9, 2007 08:08 PM

Regardless of a persons "status", they should not be "above" the law. If you own a pet, you have a responsibility...period. If Spears can't take care of her own children, why would anyone (PETA member or not) want her to care for ANYTHING?! An animal is like a child; they need to be cared for, feed, given love and attention, and NOT be exposed to the nonsense that I have no doubt goes on in that woman's house! Would you want your pet or child taken care of by her? NO. I don't blame PETA for being concerned at all; and contrary to what other people has indicated, this is not a "publicity stunt". If this were anyone else, PETA would be right there to aid the animal! I suppose PETA 100% and you should too!

Posted by: Heather | October 10, 2007 01:07 PM

Hi, Judith, Freedom Fighter,

You probably noticed too, just like I did, that "the" little man only picks on females. BIG mistake! : )
I had enough laughs with him too. He really has gotten boring! : )
We're here for the animals, and don't have time to babysit, so we will continue with what is important - the animals.
Keep up the GREAT work, Judith! For a long time, I have been almost sure that we have something in common, a certain belief that I learned about many years ago, approved of it immediately, and have strongly maintained it ever since.

Posted by: Ariel | October 10, 2007 05:29 PM

judith, wrong again on the doc, but at least you have come to terms with the fact that he is one.

Posted by: rojo | October 10, 2007 05:55 PM

Why be a Doctor when the law says you can't practice anymore.
ROJO and the BAD DR. Should unite.
Two idiots are better than one.
Just think of it.
A brand new FRANKENSTEIN made from Rojo and the bad Doc.

Posted by: Judith, Freedom Fighter | October 11, 2007 03:30 PM

Judy, Judy, Judy,

Like I said before, you epitomize PETA. An emotional wreck seasoned with misinformation. My ability to practice medicine is not and has never been threatened. Save the hooch for the weekend. Or maybe you've been fasting under a tree a bit too long.

Posted by: Christopher Cochran MD | October 12, 2007 10:43 AM

judith...

IMO rattling the pompous braggert's cage, well, is not only a waste of time
but counterproductive, feeding into his overinflated ego which is already at risk and his blathering defense reduced to slander, cutesy unwarranted comments, and more lies.

just ignore the desperate doc

he is determined to be a fool.

Posted by: 007 | October 12, 2007 03:58 PM

The animals are definitely in danger, I was horrified to
read that her latest acquisition had a broken leg, and she didn't take care of it.

Posted by: Margarita | October 18, 2007 11:58 PM

I have made my last donation to PETA. Clearly this is not the group truly wanting to help animals, but instead looking for publicity for it's president. Kevin wears fur constantly, has stated repeatedly he hate's the dogs, and small children and small animals are a bad bad combination. What on earth was this woman thinking when she debased the entire animal rights world by begging this man to help animals he not only has no interest in, but has stated he actively hates?

Posted by: Cande | December 20, 2007 01:37 AM