I think most peoples' issues with this is that it seems PETA is picking on "the little guy" when they could be trying to shut down bigger operations.

And I don't think the claim that just b/c they're holy they should be held to a higher standard - it appears that PETA holds everyone to the same standards, no matter what.

Posted by: Kristina | December 21, 2007 04:35 PM

You could not possibly have gone too far in dealing with these sick excuses for humanity. Good job, PETA.

Posted by: Canaduck | December 21, 2007 05:10 PM

You are wrong as usually,your bleeding heart liberlism has deprived another group of their livelyhood. You have made some good decisions in the past but you have been wrong and caused more problems than you have cured.

Posted by: R.Davis | December 21, 2007 06:22 PM

No, PETA didn't go too far. I don't see how that's even possible to say. Like you said, Jack, "holy" men need to be PARTICULARLY accountable!

Posted by: K | December 21, 2007 06:25 PM

Jesus lived a life of radical actions to bring justice - anything less seems to so often fall short of justice. I don't think these actions wiith the Abbey were anywhere near radical but even if they were you'd be in good company, PETA. Fantastic work, as always, of giving a voice to the voiceless!

Posted by: Kelsey | December 21, 2007 06:49 PM

As a practicing Catholic I am happy with PETA notifying the monks that what they are doing to chickens is unethical and cruel. No one is immune to criticism in regards to cruelty and violence to all sentient creatures. The Catholic Church is NOT a little guy and the monks will do just fine. At Mass parishioners will be asked to put in more money for them as is done always at the time of the offering should they need it. Monks do take a vow of poverty and obedience and adhere to humility so not to worry.

Posted by: Ana | December 21, 2007 06:54 PM

You went too far. Why couldnt you just have forced them to be chicken friendly? (by minimizing abuse)

Posted by: Caboose | December 21, 2007 06:54 PM

PETA did the right thing! An abbey has to be cruelty-free! these poor animals were in an awful condition - and when they didn't give eggs anymore they were killed anyway! Good job, PETA - thanks!

Posted by: RAINBOW WARRIOR | December 21, 2007 07:23 PM

You people are idiots. Animals are a major part of the food chain. Free range chickens or cows or pigs and ect are out of the question for mass production of a food source and have to harvested under controlled conditions. I can't believe you think these people are using methods of care that are not
the accepted standards of the industry; which I am satisified are constantly under review.

Posted by: ALFRED MOESSNER | December 21, 2007 07:34 PM

It's ridiculous for PETA to protest the treatment of chickens at Mepkin Abbey. It's hard to believe the means PETA went about it and what they did. But communities such as Mepkin have been singled out for centuries.

Posted by: David | December 21, 2007 07:48 PM

No Peta did not go to far....in fact Peta did exactly what they are suppose to do stop inhumane treatment of animals. No one should be exempt from wrong doing just because of their religion. Apparently many think that if you are a Monk you are excused from any wrong doing whatsoever......It was the right thing the rest of these people who do not support the choice to do so are the ones that really do not care one thing about animals, nor what they consume, nor where it comes from...they are just lashing out because in their little fairy tale minds monks are suppose to be peaceful people that do no harm...So to them anyone who accuses them of wrong doing is just big bullies. Good work PETA!!!!

Posted by: Dana | December 21, 2007 08:05 PM

How dare you come to my town and force your values on our people. Go back to Norfolk,va and force your views on those people.Your nothing but communists so get out of my town
Tom McDevitt
tom33jr40@aol.com

Posted by: tom mcdevitt | December 21, 2007 08:37 PM

Of course PETA did not go too far!

They already tried talking to these monks sometime ago, obviously to no avail, so they had to step it up and get a demo going.

If these monks are supposedly a peaceful, Christian group, then they should certainly NOT be engaging in cruel practices with animals, whether or not it is a business. Using the "it's their livelihood" excuse is pathetic - just like the slave masters would have tried to say in the past, and just as companies STILL say in some developing countries that use child labour and sweat shops.

It's not like these monks are incapable of doing anything but selling eggs!!

Posted by: Michele | December 21, 2007 08:53 PM

No PETA did NOT go too far.

PETA just reminded the monks what the Holy Father feels about factory farming.

There is a quote on your site--official stance from Pope Benedict XVI on factory farming.

It is on GoVeg.com--I'll quote some of it here...

"When he was asked about the rights of animals in a 2002 interview, he said, “That is a very serious question. At any rate, we can see that they are given into our care, that we cannot just do whatever we want with them. Animals, too, are God's creatures . . .

Certainly, a sort of industrial use of creatures, so that geese are fed in such a way as to produce as large a liver as possible, or hens live so packed together that they become just caricatures of birds, this degrading of living creatures to a commodity seems to me in fact to contradict the relationship of mutuality that comes across in the Bible.”"

The Pope feels it is wrong. Why were the monks doing it??

Thanks for reminding them PETA...at least there will be that many less chickens suffering.

Posted by: Tamara | December 21, 2007 09:20 PM

This was not the "little guy." This was a big money, factory farming operation.

And they pay no taxes. And don't hire people from the community, so they don't even contribute that to the community.

These religious groups try to promote this fake image of benevolence and piety and simple living. This was a cold, hard, cash operation.

The order had no business being involved in a cruel, abusive industry in the name of God.

That is dirtying God's image.

Posted by: kelly | December 21, 2007 09:45 PM

I think it is a shame to put a small business out of business because none of you have been raised on a farm. Debecking goes on in the nursery before the chicks arrive if you want it done , this is to keep them from breaking the eggs and eating the egg themselves. Do you tell the large egg producers to do this too. This is asurb.I think you have overstepped your boundaries this time.

Posted by: Rickey Ross | December 21, 2007 09:50 PM

Jack, you are right on. If you exempt one, you exempt them all. AR is a movement that, unfortunately, is rarely successful attacking at the root - cruelty must be addressed from the branches in. As you said, those who know better must be held PARTICULARLY accountable.

Moreover, the Catholic syndicate - er, church - is hardly hurting for cash.

Posted by: Anna Malova | December 21, 2007 11:35 PM

Good job, PETA. Sorry, but there are untold ways one can have a livelihood without causing animal cruelty. "It's their livelihood" is no excuse.

As for Canaduck: I guess proper grammar and punctuation are just for us "bleeding heart liberals" too, eh? You show your incredible ignorance in more ways than one!

Posted by: Michelle | December 22, 2007 12:40 AM

"You went too far. Why couldnt you just have forced them to be chicken friendly?"

Because nothing gives anyone the right to use an animal for any purpose, cruel or not.

Do we encourage priests who sexually abuse small children to only abuse older ones, or to make sure they have consent from the child? The idea that they should get special dispensation because they are "holy" is preposterous.

Posted by: DaliyVeg Editor | December 22, 2007 12:41 AM

Ana -

I was also raised Catholic - do you agree with the Crusades? That was the Catholic Chruch trying to force Its beliefes on Muslims/Jews/Etc ... And using force to enforce what the CATHOLIC church BELIEVED. Do you think PETA should do the same? Besides, I would wager the Catholic Church and PETA are the same thing in essence - they both want the same result - more recruits. I can only say that the Chruch is more admirable - they are working for 'God'.

And just b/c mass asks extra of people doesn't mean that they will give.

Caboose -

I've come to find that people on this blog don't appreciate moderation - they are extreme no matter what position they take.

But as I always say ... please prove me wrong.

Posted by: Kristina | December 22, 2007 02:29 AM

it doesnt matter who you are, when you condone such abuse and disgracive behavior- take responsibility and be liable for the consequences, idc if your a monk- dont do idiotic things- peta only seeks justice where needed, deal with it.

ps- what monk would approve this? thats like saying the miami dolphins are superbowl material. ha,

Posted by: pamandersonlover | December 22, 2007 03:23 AM

R. Davis: Learn how to spell and then learn grammar. After you complete those tasks then please edit your post and enter it again on the PETA website- you are wrong as usually. Those Monks get there livelyhood from the Vadakin. (yes i'm making fun of you)

Posted by: Anonymous | December 22, 2007 04:10 AM

Ana:
Contributions from parishoners don't support monasteries like the Trappists. They are self-sustaining, so the loss of their chicken business probably will affect them adversely. I do think there are better targets for PETA to focus on than Trappist monks, such as the huge egg conglomerates who do far more damage to chickens. As for whether or not "holy men" should be more accountable, I would ask, more accountable than whom? I don't think they should be more accountable than, say, Land O'Lakes or Eggland's Best, whose chickens number in the hundreds of thousands, and all of whom live terrible lives. But Trappists, who are vegetarian, probably could find a more appropriate business than selling eggs, especially those produced through inhumane practices.

Posted by: Susannah S | December 22, 2007 08:56 AM

Jack - PETA did not go too far. The way diseases are spreading with global warming, you may have saved them all from the bird flu. Seriously. They should thank you.

Now follow up. Don't screw them. PETA has an obligation to help them find a new way to earn money and MAKE IT EASIER AND MORE PROFITABLE!

That's what it's all about - showing people that treating animals kindly is good for everyone. Don't abandon them now. Promote their cause so they won't go broke thanks to your actions.

Kristina, you are so right on. I like that you and I represent moderation on this forum. Reaching real people and saving real animals.

I vow from now on not to respond to the extremists. I'll call it a new year's resolution ;)

Posted by: Maya, C.V.T. | December 22, 2007 11:36 AM

I think Peta did go to far b/c well in the video i didnt see it as bad as those other egg farms. they had descent food and water and their feathers were health. so yes they did go to far

Posted by: Unknown | December 22, 2007 12:48 PM

Everybody should be treated the same way. Monk or factory, if you mistreat animals, then you deserve to be attacked. Abuse is abuse. So kUdoS! Plus, they are monks. They should be humane and taking good care of the animals, not treating them like that. Tsk tsk.

Posted by: ngoc | December 22, 2007 04:37 PM

Even the Pope has said that factory farming is wrong and that we should be taking better care of God's creation. Those monks were not following God's will when it came to making money to run the Abbey. There are a million decent and ethical ways of making money, and having an egg factory farm ain't one of them. I am with Peta 100%.
Regarding going after the "big" over the "small" guy, NONSENSE! One animal saved from a lifetime of horrible suffering is enough to go after anyone, big, medium or small.

Posted by: Marcy | December 22, 2007 07:10 PM

Wonderful news! Thanks, PETA, for helping to bring attention to the suffering of these chickens at the Abbey. Way to go, PETA! Hopefully, more people will decide to go vegan as a result of your continued good work in behalf of animals everywhere. "Holy men" are not above reproach.

Posted by: Kayla Worden | December 22, 2007 08:14 PM

I don't think PETA went too far at all. I do find it strange, though, that people claiming to live their lives in such a holy way were not already aware that they should not be practicing cruelty to animals. Why did PETA have to tell them that what they were doing is wrong?

Posted by: Antigone1000 | December 22, 2007 08:31 PM

Well said Ana! I don't even need to read further!

:o)

Posted by: Jaclyn | December 22, 2007 10:32 PM

I can't believe this is still a discussion... Did Peta go too far??

Because they're a small organization Peta went too far?? 20,000 chickens does not costitute a small organization.

Because they are monks Peta went too far?? We shouldn't provide excuses for anyone, especially for these men. I attended Catholic schools my entire life, even in college and believe me, any other brotherhood learning of this egg factory would not approve. I don't care if it is Jesuits or Dominicans, or whatever brotherhood, none of them would approve.

Again, I can't believe that people are still providing excuses for them.

Posted by: Jaclyn | December 22, 2007 10:51 PM

go to charleston.net to read local comments.

Posted by: heehaw | December 23, 2007 12:19 AM

I'm a Benedictine Monk and I love animals. I am glad that the cruelty has stopped at Mepkin, however, I do not appreciate the assumption that religious people are holy. The reason I became a monk is that I am NOT holy. If I were holy I would not find a need to go to a monastery. I am 100% for Peta's cause but I do not appreciate the misrepresentation of religious. Monks are human beings and should be held to the SAME standard as every single human being on the planet. I hope that you've opened their eyes, but you should not expect them to be holy. That is an injustice to monks like myself who have devoted their lives to confronting their so called demons, head on, trying everyday, attempting to become better people. May I remind you that no one on this side of the grave is holy. Only God is holy. I am glad you shut down egg production at Mepkin, but I ask that you not attack all monks. You are the ones who are calling monks "Men of God." I am a monk and I look at myself as a "Dark individual who needs the grace of God." I am for Peta's cause, but please be careful not to shed a bad light on all religious. Please stick with Animal Rights, and feel free to explore Theology, but please express RIGHT THEOLOGY before you use broad brush strokes to make all monks and Catholics look like a bunch of morons. This sort of angle that you are using only makes people who are vegetarians look like vigilantes. Please be careful not to ostacize those who support you. I support the cause, I just request that you go about it more skillfully.

Posted by: Benedictine Monk | December 23, 2007 12:32 AM

Well done PETA for sticking up for animals and chickens too! Who but you would of got these animals out of those awful conditions?

Well done from us here in Ireland

Posted by: John Carmody | December 23, 2007 07:10 AM

Now we (in SC) have to buy inferior eggs manufactured in worse conditions. Great work, you really showed them! I think you didn't go too far enough.

Posted by: Anonymous | December 23, 2007 11:39 AM

PETA did not go too far at all. What they are doing is wrong; monks or not. If someone does something wrong, it needs to be addressed, no matter who they are. They may do some good things, but that doesn't mean they are excused for their cruelty!

Posted by: Aleasha | December 23, 2007 02:17 PM

I am consistently perplexed by anyone who would compare marginal chicken treatment to life scarring abuse of a child. I appreciate that I haven't evolved to such a higher sense of being. I can't imagine anyone making such a comparison who has children of their own.

Posted by: Christopher Cochran MD | December 23, 2007 03:01 PM

Kristina

I am well aware of the history of the Catholic Church for many reasons, one being I have a PhD in History and I took great interest in religion in my studies and research as well. No, I do not support the Crusades nor the Inquisition either. Being the Sec'y of Catholic Concern for Animals-USA I view the chicken business differently. The president of CCA-USA and I started a letter campaign requesting that these very monks stop their torture of these chickens and find a more peaceful way to make money as it behooves them as monks. So many compassionate Catholics were writing to ask for an end to this horrible situation for the chickens. PETA, like CCA, promote compassion. There is nothing wrong with that. The story of the Garden of Eden is just that, one of compassion and peace. No one is being killed because according to what was written in Genesis God provided humans with a cruelty-free diet. Also, the goal in the Bible is for the lamb to lay down with the lion. Perhaps it would be of interest to you to see the website, Catholic Concern for Animals, www.catholic-animals.org and become privy to the work of CCA.
No one made excuses for priests or ministers, men of God, when they were caught in sexual situations that were totally unacceptable. Most Catholic monks take vows of poverty and most of the orders require not eating meat (animals).
Yes, people do give at Mass and that is why there is much money for Cathoic Charities and for the Church in general. Throughout the history of the Church it has had to make vast improvements and changes. Monks not torturing chickens for profit is just one of many changes.

Susannah S

I don't distinguish anyone from being more accountable. Everyone from every walk of life should be accountable by the same standards. Cruelty to the other animals in any form from any person is still ultimately cruelty and should be unacceptable for any reasons.

Posted by: Ana | December 23, 2007 03:11 PM

I am so grateful for the work and dedication PETA shows in being a voice for living beings in a world that is deaf, dumb and blind. If you want to eat decaying animal flesh and where fur, that's your choice. I support PETA for advocating for those who do not have a choice.

Posted by: Annette | December 23, 2007 04:39 PM

PETA went too far. You helped out the corporate factory farms that do far worse to chickens on a much larger scale, increased hostility toward vegans.

Your net effect was negative toward the goals you say you are seeking, as are many, many of your actions. And that is why I fight your destructive tactics, because I do actually care for animals and their well-being.

Posted by: Dorothy N | December 23, 2007 05:07 PM

forget anyone saying you werent right to do that. Even if they are just the "little guys" doesn't mean u should just ignore them abusing animals. Those animals as important any other animal being abused in a big corporation

Posted by: Alexa | December 23, 2007 09:40 PM

If you believe in religion then you must agree that Jesus would have not have approved of what the monks were doing. I hate it when men use the excuse about being given dominion over animals. Man has abused ever privilage he was given.

Jesus was a compassionate person and lived his life without abusing or causing suffering to man or animal. The political men who put the Bible together left that part out for a reason.

Posted by: Maggy | December 23, 2007 10:13 PM

PETA always goes too far. Just how it is. I've come to expect nothing but the utmost perfection in stupidity and extremism from this absurd group of individuals who claim to know everything when it comes to the welfare of animals. Animal rights? Your group is making a mockery of animal welfare in general. No wonder no one takes any animal welfare group seriously. Just admit that you are the ALF in disguise and turn yourselves over to the authorities now. Everyone will be much better off.

Posted by: Chrissy | December 23, 2007 11:55 PM

Ana-

Please define what you think is 'torture'. I find this topic (amongst others on this board) as truely fascinating. People get so passionate (I am not faulting that) but when that happens they lose complete sight of the true topic and lambasting (on both sides of the topic ensues) does not contribute to the discussion.

Plus, I apologize, comparing Priests abusing children and 'torturing' animals are two completely different subjects. It bodes well if that topic is left for another blog.

Plus, I would like to see where the vows stipulate not involving meat, etc. I know and understand every monastery is different, but I do recall the bible stating that God gave dominion over every beast to Adam.

Maggy -

Who are you to know what Jesus would or would not aprove of? That is just presumptious and pretentious.

Annette -

First off, learn how to spell the right word, it lends credibility to your arguement. Also, I would wager, animals can fight. How can you be sure that the animals didn't fight back against their 'oppresores'?

Posted by: Kristina | December 24, 2007 12:42 AM

Lol Michelle with your

As for Canaduck: I guess proper grammar and punctuation are just for us "bleeding heart liberals" too, eh? You show your incredible ignorance in more ways than one!

Tipical Liberal

Posted by: Crazy | December 24, 2007 01:08 AM

I have to say ... I can't even think to even read this blog anymore. I wanted to contribute as a voice of moderation/reason and yet I only find extremism.

I was willing to listen to the oppostion and state my position but I must say ... you fanatics for or against PETA do your side harm. I do not want to listen to the pro or anti PETA extremists. I hold my head in disappointment that you people are not willing to engage in a discussion that could possbily educate both sides and you do not use the brains you were given to think!

Animals need our help, that is not to be in question, but animals do not need our human, self-serving agendas.

I wish I could end in either pro/anti PETA sentiment ... but I cannot. Both sides have made me sad. Truely sad.

And I don't care for the people ... only for the animals who will ultimately suffer for our selfishness.

Admirable on both sides! I can't even begin to understand you.

Posted by: Kristina | December 24, 2007 01:21 AM

Well, what else is new. My husband and I buy the Monks eggs all the time, actually I have been eating them all of my life. Gosh! Why don't you use some of those funds and go after the big corp. You want to know why you don't? The big corps.attorneys would not allow it.

Posted by: beasley | December 24, 2007 10:33 AM

Christopher Cochran: you like to be open-armed welcome on this blog but your remarks have always the same bad smell - what are you looking for? We are animal rights activists and LOVE animals! If this number is too big for you - don't show up always here but go elsewhere! If this horrific badtreatment of these poor chickens is 'marginal' for your small bigot understanding then why do you pass all your time here - I think as an MD - as you are pretending - you got other things to do - I really don't understand your attitude or do you want yo play the 'arbiter diaboli'?

Posted by: RAINBOW WARRIOR | December 24, 2007 11:31 AM

Chrissy: your primitive words are stinking - go away!

Posted by: little big woman | December 24, 2007 11:36 AM

Ana -
I am a member of your organization, actually, and I wasn't accusing you of anything. I certainly believe that everyone needs to be accountable for their actions towards animals, including monks. My point was that while Mempkin Abbey was shut down, there are huge conglomerates that are chugging along just fine and they turn amazing profits on the misery of chickens. Each victory is just that, a victory, but I think an organization of PETA's power and publicity could be better utilized to shut down, say, Land O'Lakes or one of the big egg-laying concerns, and Catholic Concern for Animals could be shutting down the Mepkin Abbeys of the world, or helping them to become aware of ways to be self-sustaining other than raising chickens. To me, it seemed a little like taking a sledge hammer to a gnat, that's all.
While we celebrate the loss of Mepkin Abbey's chicken industry, Butterball is just gearing up for Christmas.

Posted by: Susannah S | December 24, 2007 11:52 AM

Christopher Cochran: as you reproached to the PETA bloggers to be breast-beating and teeth-gnashing - so i'm proud to be one of them because i see that this makes you feeling bored! and soon i hope - we shall be cochran-free! Yeahhhhhhhhh!!!

Posted by: King Kobra | December 24, 2007 12:43 PM

cocky:
as far as i can see you're neither in the urgency room nor out for hunting! so you think as it is vacation that there is nobody onboard and you can open your mouth widely - but behold - me i'm eyes and ears at peta because i've got aaaaaall my free time alone at home for to watch and prevent all the evil spirits getting the upper hand here on Christmas eve and the holy silent night! capisc????

Posted by: octopus | December 24, 2007 12:50 PM

I think it's an excellent point, why target a monestary when these big, polluting industries are getting away with murder?

I think the answer is that chickens are chickens, and they suffer equally no matter who is abusing them. And big conglomerates take DECADES to shut down, unfortunately, and PETA is working hard at that every day. In the meantime, if they can quickly save hundreds of animals, why not do so?

As I said before, PETA has an obligation to follow up and help the Abbey gain more profit than ever. They deserve a reward now.

I also think it's perfectly reasonable to talk about abusing children and chickens in the same sentence. Listen, no one is saying "Chickens should have a car, a good education, and be able to have health insurance"

All we're saying is, look at the conditions we're keeping these living beings in. Even my freaking plants have more light and space than those poor animals. WTF?????

If someone were keeping children in those cages, the punishment from the authorities and society would be severe. We are not saying that children ARE chickens, we are just saying that chickens should be treated as living, dependent beings - not like garbage.

Posted by: Maya, C.V.T. | December 24, 2007 02:47 PM

Kristina -
you tell us that 'God gave dominion over all the beasts to Adam'! This is a so-called catastrophic misinterpretation of an ancient mystic tale - like the culpabilization of Eve having offered 'the apple to Adam'! This symbolic ancient tale was the reason of women's discrimination since ever but anyhow, please know that not everybody here on the blog is Christian! There are many other religions here and all they have the same right! Me i'm a Taoist and hence I strictly refuse every kind of interference with nature and the animal kingdom! They have the same right to live as we do without being oppressed, tortured and killed in every moment - and also I doubt that the Christ should condone something like this and please don't try to play a good Christian and to give bible lessons - we are well-informed! Thanks for the caring love!

Posted by: Zanoni | December 24, 2007 02:52 PM

wow, crossfire!

I'm the sniper in the red building, 6th floor if you need me. (Dont be surprised if you find me playing Half-Life, or reading Bushisms)

Posted by: Caboose | December 24, 2007 06:08 PM

I do not advocate poor conditions for chickens, but whenever someone attempts to equate the abuse of children to the abuse of chickens I believe it to be an innappropriate comparison. This is where Ingrid and I disagree. I would never trust a pediatrician without kids, nor would I hold a childless person's comparisons (Ingrid's famous "is a boy" comment) in any validity.

Posted by: Christopher Cochran MD | December 24, 2007 06:17 PM

Not at all! Thankyou for your efforts to shut down this cruelty factory. So glad so many lives will not suffer in future in those cages and that my fellow carolinians had a little education in what they are really buying into when they dont purposely select free range. Good job, maybe those monks can pray for forgiveness and go on to do something good with their lives that will benefit this planet.

Posted by: Caroline Rowland | December 24, 2007 07:28 PM

I don't know whether PETA went too far. I know that the video's of the HUGE chicken operations look much dirtier, and vile, than the Monks egg farm. Living in the Charleston area, I chose to buy the Mepkin Abbey Eggs when they were available over those that were shipped in from across the country. I thought it was better for the environment, less shipping and wasted fuel. I guess I'll just have to raise my own chickens for eggs. Don't worry, they'll be able to run around, we have about 12 acres, and they'll have plenty of food and water.

Posted by: sharon | December 24, 2007 08:27 PM

Um... all you people who keep saying Jesus would never condone what the monks are doing -- you do realize Jesus ate fish, and had parables about meat meals (like killing the fatted calf to welcome a prodigal son home)?

Ignorance about what you talk about also diminishes your cause. FYI.

Posted by: Dorothy N | December 24, 2007 09:49 PM

Dorothy N:
unfortunately it's you who are the ignorant in the whole story: when Jesus talked about meat and fish he was talking to ignorant people - so he had to use ordinary words - about the meat it was exactly in the tax collector's house! do you think they were eating ambrosia? in that times people were far behind in evolution! Jesus himself said that he shall send the Holy Spirit after his disappearance because he could not tell us everything because the world would not understand it! Apparently you are one of those who still does not understand! And an allegoric story is not history, too!!! Today we have the Saints and studying their lifestyle you should hear other things than meateating for ex: St. Benedict of Nursia, St. John from the Cross, St. Theresia of Lisieux, St. Bruno the Carthesian, St. Hubertus, St. Bernard of Clairvaux, St. Francis from Assisi, St. Joseph of Copertino, St. Chrysostomos and all the Church-fathers of the first Christian hour - also the first Christians in the world in Ethiopia are still nowadays strict vegetarians and so on ! also St. Paul was against meat-eating and additionally to this many other religions like Hinduism, Sikkhism, Buddhism, Taoism, Sufism etc. are against the killing of animals! but this here is not a religious blog! so it's better for you to go for a retarded old fashioned traditional 'christian' blog!

Christopher Cochran: i'm not childless but me and my children love our animals as we love ourselves - it would be better that you would not have animals - instead of... you're really really boring!

Posted by: animalfriend | December 26, 2007 06:49 AM

Dr. Cochran,

I also cringe at the comparison most of the time, when people look at my cats and say, "They're like your children!" It makes me kind of nauseous.

However, I think the reason people use that analogy is that SO MANY people treat other living beings like objects.

At that point, how the hell do you educate them?? Our local zoo that keeps a margay in a tiny steel cage where it can't stand up, the people who chain their dog outside in the below-freezing weather, the people who adopted a cat from the local shelter and returned it, completely emaciated, and said their ten year old didn't feed it?

What would YOU say to those folks to help them understand their illegal and despicable actions?

I've done it for many years and the only analogy that works sometimes is "is that how you would treat a child?"

Peace!

Posted by: Maya, C.V.T. | December 26, 2007 10:44 AM

Many people on here are saying that PETA should have gone after bigger egg producers/factory farming businesses instead of focusing on these monks. Well, remember that PETA DOES target the larger entities on an ongoing basis but, obviously, bigger organizations are harder to change. So--we should be thankful for this smaller victory that may help in gaining larger victories down the road. You have to pick your battles and take any win you can get because they all help the cause.

Posted by: Antigone1000 | December 26, 2007 11:07 AM

Some People see some animal activists as extremists and do not see that the bottom line is to bring justice for animals. It does not matter if the group is a small religious unit or a large corporation. Animals need to be treated as fairly as a baby, person, or any other living creature. The person who does not understand Peta's operation has not opened their heart to an animal, really looked into their eyes, and does not have compassion. It is terrible that in a society like today that we still have racism and cruelty to animals and want to fight to keep it that way. As long as violence is not used, Peta has not gone too far.

Posted by: Compassion4theMasses | December 26, 2007 01:17 PM

Maya, I couldn't have said it better. This is after all PETA and we are FOR ANIMALS.

It's not fair that a living, breathing being should suffer such a miserable life and have nothing to look forward to except deing from desease and misery. I honestly believe that any person who can sit there, and honestly not feel anything at all for an innocent creature getting tortured is a bad person with no heart and after reading reading these blogs I have unfortunately come to see that there is alot of bad people in this world including Mr. COCKrhan "MD". It's so sad that there is so little compassian in the world. I don't care who they are, if they area busing animals, and PETA shut them down, than it's a victory hands down.

And by the way, Tom, your comment had to be the most juvenile comment EVER with absolutely no argument. Alfred Moessner: It's very possible to have free range cows and chickens. Not only is it possible, but it would be great for the economy if you really think about it.

And Rickey Ross, I grew up on farms all my life right outside of Miami and had every animal you could think of. I especially loved my baby chickens. I never debeaked any of my chicks and took very very good care of all my animals. I don't know what cruel farm you grew up on but none of my farms ever EVER supported that cruelty.

Posted by: Ashley H. | December 26, 2007 03:14 PM

Just far enough as far as I'm concerned.

Funny they didn't decided to go free range like you would imagine eggs supplied by monks to be, mustn't be enough money in that hey, even though they love everyone of the chickens.

For those that say Peta is picking on the monks and not the big businesses, that is crap, they pick on everyone who are torturing animals that they know about.

Posted by: Sonia | December 26, 2007 10:01 PM

in my personal opinion, PETA did not go too far. No animal deserves to suffer the way those chickens suffered. for those of you that think this was okay, shame on you! if someone cut off your nose with a blade then shoved you in a blender, or put you in a cage smaller than you are and then never fed you, would you like it? i bet you wouldn't. maybe someone should do that to you; you'd think twice before you said animal abuse was okay. which is basically what your saying by claiming that PETA went too far.

Posted by: stephanie | December 26, 2007 10:54 PM

What came first the chicken or the egg or the cage.
Good work Peta !

Posted by: Chris Tucker | December 26, 2007 11:43 PM

Animal welfare applies to EVERYONE. No compromising on this issue. WAY TO GO PETA!

Posted by: carol tuskan | December 27, 2007 12:04 AM

a-friend, listen, I wasn't the one who brought up Jesus, it was you PETA-theologians who claimed Jesus was on your side.

FYI, Jesus *ATE* *FISH*, he didn't just "speak down" to unevolved tax collectors.

For the record, I'm an agnostic, and despise reality-averse zealots: whether they be right wing fundamentalists, or left wing PETA extremists. There are no grays in an zealot's world, and no way to come to compromise.

A zealot will equate a lesbian mother with a murderer, a family farm with an industrial meat slaughterhouse, or a meat slaughterhouse with the Jewish holocaust. And in so doing, a zealot will abet evil by obfuscating what it really means. A splinter really is different than a 200 year old redwood, you know, even though they are both made of wood...

Posted by: Dorothy N | December 27, 2007 01:08 AM

Once again, to my sarcastic surprise, I see religion rearing its ugly head in a conflict where it does not belong. Try taking it out of the picture. A monk is a person, and a chicken is an animal. If any person were caught abusing an animal in any way, shape, or form, the proper authorities would be alerted. PETA, being the proper authority in this case, did the right thing. Congradulations on helping innocence.

Posted by: Aj | December 27, 2007 02:52 AM

barbaric, well done peta, monks acting like villains, i am a practicing catholic, this needs to be told, so it never happens again, i do not eat factory eggs, why can they not make candles or knit mittens, so they make extra money, i have 3 jobs, so my children can go to catholic school, to learn this torture on animals, CLOSE THEM DOWN, AND PUT SOME OF THEM IN THOSE TINY CAGES, ANIMAL ABUSERS, THEY NEED TO LEARN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: betty gale | December 27, 2007 10:50 AM

Antigone1000 and Compassion4theMasses, your comments are GREAT! You have summed it up very well. There are lots of other great comments here too, from betty, Aj, Maya, etc, etc.

A human (who IS an animal as well) just should not get to decide who gets treated well and who does not. This is just like racism, only it applies to a particular species instead.

I am not a religious person, but for those of you who are defending the monks based on religion and the Bible, you should check out the Christian Vegetarian Association at www.all-creatures.org/cva.

Posted by: Michele | December 27, 2007 11:55 AM

Good job PETA!
By the way: the words 'fish' and 'bread' and 'stone' and 'jug' and 'water' and 'wine' appearing in the gospels have a symbolic meaning and stand for human qualities! The twelve baskets filled with 'fish' and 'bread' mean 'the twelve tribes of Israel; some chapters later on Jesus explaining this himself! It's funny to see how some animal haters use every opportunity to take the gospels and Jesus as a 'green light' for animal abuse! But an idiot remains an idiot - and there is no medicine against it - too bad for them!

Posted by: rafael | December 27, 2007 01:15 PM

You did not go too far! Exposing cruelty of any type is not wrong. Those men of God should read their Bible to see what God thinks of animals. Whom did he first create to keep Adam company? Whom did Noah take on the ark?
God highly ranks animals and so do I! They should know better, they deserve what they get.

Posted by: Darla | December 27, 2007 03:08 PM

It's issues like these that causes anger and hate towards PETA.

Posted by: Mike P. | December 27, 2007 05:00 PM

In the end, PETA is right to go after ANYONE who abuses ANY animal or who keeps animals in ways that prevent them from living a healthy and natural life. So PETA was right to go after Mepkin Abbey's egg factory and if it helped to shut it down, that's good. I have a soft spot for the Trappists, being devoted to the works of Thomas Merton, but neither Merton nor most Trappists would condone raising chickens at all, let alone raising them in that cruel and unnatural way. So, well done PETA! And I still say, stay on top of the big guys, too. I want to see the big egg conglomerates out of business as soon as possible.

Posted by: Susannah S | December 27, 2007 05:31 PM

All you people that claim so hard to be God fearing people in this forum...I know some of you make comments about Jesus, & God but have no religion at all...but the ones of you that do claim to have faith why on earth do you use religion as a foundation to justify any animal abuse...why do you take verses that may or may not mean what you think they do and throw them out in such negative ways. Anyone who claims to have any faith at all should be well aware of your teachings...no church I have ever attended sent out the message go and bash everyone with religious versus, and push people away from the church. Unfortunately you all need to get in touch with God more than us animal rights advocates ever will for we are not the ones pushing people away from God!!!!!! I do not think that God, Jesus, or any other religious figure would approve of any of you using the bible in this manner...all it does is take people that do have faith, but are also are animal rights activist and make them start to question the whole religious deal all together!!!!!!! You are pushing people away from Christianity so be very careful for your punishment on judgement day may actually be far worse than those of us that care about All of God’ creatures.

The history channel recently ran a great special called “Banned from the Bible” it is about all of the books that humans made the choice not to put in the bible...HUMANS! Have you ever stopped to really think that their could be more out there due to the fact that humans were responsible for putting the bible together...would you trust anything that our government officials got together and decided what goes in and what goes out in the creation of the Bible today? Where the times of the creation of the bible really that different in terms of manipulation, political gain, and propaganda I for one do not think so because the wickedness of humans has been around since the start of time....Would you trust George Bush to write the Bible
So what if there is more to this than you know...and what if the ARA are right, and you are wrong? None of us ARA are who we are because of religion it is just a part of who we are! many times its a calling that can not be ignored...we do not try and justify one inch of it with religion so why on earth should the rest of you use it to justify going against us?

Cochran

Ingrid Newkirk’s statement is a boy, is a pig...........was not a comparison my gosh if you would listen to the whole thing you would know the comparison boils down to we all share a central nervous system, and we all feel PAIN!!!!!!!

Posted by: Dana | December 27, 2007 08:55 PM

To me, "chicken-friendly" means not killing and eating them. That doesn't seem friendly at all.

Minimize abuse? Really. If someone is beating you over the head, do you say "Please minimize this abuse over a period of time?" No, you say "STOP IT NOW!"

Here we go with "force" again. We can't force anyone to do anything. If a business or group succumbs to pressure, great. It's the American way. But as powerful as we may be, we cannot force. We can protest, speak up, encourage, cajole, etc., but we cannot force. If you feel "forced", perhaps it's something inside you speaking to you.

Sorry, but if abuses occur in "your" town, we may show up. And please get yourself an education or at least a dictionary.

Posted by: Karen | December 27, 2007 09:09 PM

Dana: great comment - great exposée! Thanks - Merci!

Posted by: Le Petit Prince | December 28, 2007 10:05 AM

Note to Kristina:
Please. NOT the old "God gave people dominion over animals" thing. Dominion does NOT mean "domination." It means stewardship, as in, caring for, looking out for, acting in the best interests of animals under our care. Nothing in the gospels or in the teachings of Jesus (or any other great spiritual teacher, for that matter) would justify or defend the current conditions under which most animals categorized as "food" are kept today. The factory farms are travesties of farming, having nothing to do with the well being of the animals and everything to do with the almighty buck! If they keep proliferating, they will, in time, destroy us, between the adverse affects they have on the environment and the rampant diseases that result from overcrowding, many of which are resistant to nearly all antibiotics because of the overuse of said antibiotics on these farms. Whether we like it not, we HAVE to pay attention to our misuse and abuse of farm animals and the lands they occupy. It's in our own interest as well as theirs. "Dominion?"
No. Exploitation is the word you're looking for. Abusive, wasteful, often criminally negligent exploitation. If you think Jesus would defend this, you couldn't be more wrong, in my opinion. And the more I think about it, I applaud the work that PETA did in shutting down Mepkin Abbey's egg production.

And Dana: "None of us ARA are who we are because of religion." I'm not entirely sure about that, in my case, although I know what you mean. I'm Catholic,(although the Church might have a few issues with me on the subject of what that means) and I take the injunction to respect all life very seriously. Although my religion wasn't the initial reason I became vegan and ARA, I find much to support those positions in my faith, particularly from the writings of certain Trappist monks, ironically enough. There are so many layers and levels of awareness to becoming an ARA, and it usually happens in increments rather than all at once. I think spiritual practice augments and helps that transition, rather than working against it. But your point was a good one.

Posted by: Susannah S | December 28, 2007 11:36 AM

>>In the end, PETA is right to go after ANYONE who abuses ANY animal or who keeps animals in ways that prevent them from living a healthy and natural life.

Fine: go ahead and do that. When you pick your battles poorly (like going after the little guy instead of the conglomerate) and use tactics that make reasonable people recoil with revulsion (like visit schools with horrific pictures like the anti-abortion people do), don't act all surprised when people who would have been your allies in protecting animals think you are jerks and fight against you.

Posted by: Dorothy N | December 28, 2007 11:53 AM

Dorothy N: OK. I'm willing to be a "jerk", and I would even welcome the "fight" if it means that the animals benefit from it and, finally, come into their own and have rights, just like us humans.
Jerks Against Jerky - YES!

Posted by: Susannah S | December 28, 2007 01:56 PM

Fair enough Dana, but understand that abused children is a very sensitive issue and any comparison that might diminish said issue is in my opinion unacceptable. I love animals, all animals and I work very hard to promote animals, especially wild animals, but I would torture a million cats if it would relieve the suffering of one innocent child. Fortunately this theoretical situation doesn't exist, but when it comes to children, especially my own, all animals otherwise are completely expendable and insignificant by comparison. Thank goodness I do not have to make such a choice.

Posted by: Christopher Cochran MD | December 28, 2007 06:00 PM

Hmm...so I read the original letter that was sent to the Abbey, and it does sound like some of their practices really weren't acceptable. But what frustrates me is that PETA is forced to go after people like the monks, who although they have raised lots of chickens, I'm almost certain those numbers would dwarf the numbers of chickens raised by huge corporations. Those are the people who should really be changing to make a huge difference in national and worldwide animal treatment. But I do understand that you really can't go after the big guys because they are big, and can defend themselves. I'm not condoning what the monks did, I'm just frustrated that the big corporations won't change. And as one of the other comments said, PETA, PLEASE don't leave the abbey high and dry. Help them to find another way of supporting themselves since you took their source of income away from them.

Posted by: Michelle | December 28, 2007 06:36 PM

Cochran,
Have you ever looked around at exactly what forum you are posting in? It would seem to me if you have such issues with child abuse you would not waste such valuable time in the Peta forums instead you would be spending all of your extra time working at safe homes, or helping abused children. In that case you would not have one ounce of time to worry about your theory of the difference between children, and animals. I think that you may be amongst the wrong crowd with your thought process, but to each is own it is always good to be reminded exactly how the other side thinks. I myself do not think that this statement ever had anything to do with diminishing child abuse, and you are being extra sensitive to even think so. I also would love to know why you promote animals especially wild animals??? What is it that you promote them for?? Was that suppose to be protect??? If so that would confuse me much more for you do very little for the protection of wild animals in fact you do the opposite you kill them. To me animal abuse is no less or more important than child abuse I think people that do either are weak minded, scum of the earth people. I still do not see why you refuse to look at the link between animal abuse, and child abuse you know that it is a proven fact that the majority of people that will harm animals, would no doubt harm children as well. I just do not understand why instead of getting all bent out of shape over a comment you are not more willing to see the lines that run parallel between the two abuses, and work toward a world without either. As for you torturing a million cats to save your children what on earth would you ever make a comment such as this for? The chances of you having to ever torture a million cats to save your children is slim to none, so for you to make this comparison worries me more about you than any comparison between animal and child abuse ever will.

Posted by: Dana | December 28, 2007 08:54 PM

Michelle,
It is not up to Peta to find these monks a new way of providing for themselves. They have the opportunity to find some other way of making money, but it is up to them to find that route not Peta. Maybe some of you that want to help them should start trying to find ways to do so on a personal level without asking Peta. I have seen many post here that say “we will request supermarkets not stop carrying their eggs” and “we will boycott Peta” or “Peta please help the monks find another way of life”, but I have not seen one “This is what “I” am going to do to help the monks...........If your concern is these monks look to help them. I am very pleased that they seen the error of their ways, and will no longer practice animal cruelty that commends great praise, and respect on their parts...but it is now up to them to find an alternative way of life for something that should not have been a way of life in the first place. The bigger corporations unfortunately do not have a conscience, and they have the deep pockets to fund any backlash against their “big” companies....Peta does go after big companies it is just harder to make them see the error of their ways so quickly when for one they don’t care about anything but money, and they can buy themselves out of almost any fix with the money that the majority of American’s are providing them with on a daily bases by buying their products.

Posted by: Dana | December 29, 2007 10:01 AM

Dana,
I am sorry you have missed the point to my theoretical situation.

I promote wildlife because I believe someday as urban sprawl continues we will not be able to enjoy the biodiversity in the wild that we still enjoy today. The fact that I choose to harvest/kill/murder a tiny percentage of said wildlife does not mean that I do not find it precious, in fact, I contend that it bolsters my appreciation for the wildlife I help promote. Since the lives of my family are infinitely more precious to me than any deer or quail (though I care deeply for both), I am proud to feed my family from my land healthy, chemical free, low fat, high protein game. If I believed in gods I would thank the animal gods every time I harvested an animal, but since I don't, I enjoy a moment of personal, spiritual, gratitude not completely different from religion, each time I bring natures bounty, be it plant, or animal, to my family's table. I am thankful every time my family eats a grocery store free, or at least limited, meal. Call me barbaric if you will, but if getting all my ultra-processed foods from the grocery store while living elbow to elbow with an urban neighbor makes me civilized, I choose to be a barbarian. Best wishes and Happy New Year!

Posted by: Christopher Cochran MD | December 29, 2007 12:20 PM

Michelle, I am willing to put cash on the line betting that the geniuses at PETA will do absolutely nothing for the monks whose livelihood they have destroyed.

I would love to be proven wrong, but sadly, the history of PETA is that they are great at tearing down but not building up.

Go ahead, prove me wrong, PETA. Set up a substitute for what you have broken, and I pledge $100 donation.

Posted by: Dorothy N | December 29, 2007 09:38 PM

Zanoni -

Did I ever once state I was a Christian? Thank you for ASSUMING that I was one. I could give a damn about organized religion ... but that was not my point.

Zanoni and Susannah S -

I was merely quoting the Bible, is that a crime? I truly wanted to stay away from this blog, but I will not allow someone to misinterpret what I have said.

For that matter, Susannah S. -

I must ask ... how do you know what Christ would feel, do, act? That is profoundly presumptious.

And no, I meant 'dominion' because that is what it says in the bible. Maybe read it for your own education.

On a side note -

Once again, bringing up such issues as women's rights is a red herring, you do better to bring that up on another blog.

My issue, I will state once again, is that PETA went after the 'little guy'. There are bigger fish to fry than monks. Bring down the real villians and other people will follow.

Posted by: Kristina | December 30, 2007 01:17 AM

Yes, PETA did go too far.
This organization pulled funding from an otherwise green and sustainable community without offering any real resolution. You all complain with no real results. Your ultimate intention was for people to go egg free, but in reality people who buy Mepkin Abbey eggs to support their cause will just buy their eggs from the next-albeit corporate-- brand at the market.
Yes, you all raised a good point that men of God should treat His creatures as it is written in the Bible. The monks realized that they lost sight of this fact and subsequently closed their farm. The monks did not have to legally close their farm but they did anyways in the name of their beliefs.
But your interest group should feel the burden of keeping this monostary afloat. You do not lawfully have to do it. However, on the basis of ethics (which your group supposedly is built upon) helping the monks get their feet off the ground to rebuild something to help them sustain their livelihoods is ethically the right thing to do. Because for all its worth the Trappist monks are by far the greenist living people out there. The live with minimal electricity, eat food that they themselves grow, and use limited amounts non-renewable energy. PETA basically pulled a huge chunk of their funding that helps them sustain this type of life--a type of "green" life which PETA claims to support.
If PETA really stands for the Ethical Treatment of anything I suggest getting off your elitist asses and start resolving how you are going to help these trappist monks sustain their well-beings after you have just pulled their livelihoods from under their noses.--oh and "being the first person in line to buy whatever the next cruelty-free product the abbey decides to sell" (A. Elizabeth, Post and Courier 28Dec2007) isn't the type of responsiblity-free, consumer support I was talking about.

Posted by: Nicole Bulalacao | December 30, 2007 02:48 AM

Cochran,
I did not miss your so called theoretical point for you did not exactly make a point at all. Many times you have justified your killing of wild animals with the fact that you provide your family a chemical free meal so to tell the story again is quite pointless considering most of us do not buy your excuse at all.

I see you completely ignored the comment I made in reference to you killing a million cats to save your children, but this is not a shock! You always try and insult people intelligence when you are not quite sure how to respond to a comment by saying “I am sorry you missed my point”.. . frankly it is getting quite old. You pretend to have some compassionate side toward animals, and then refer to yourself as barbaric which by the way is really comical when you think about it.

If you cared about animals at all you would not eat them period end of story...you would not have to worry if they were chemical free, hormone free, or a wild kill. You are no different from the many hunters out there that swear they are doing something great for the protection of wild life by purchasing hunting licenses that supposedly go to fund wild life conservation. The truth is the balance of nature would work quite well without you hunting if we would just stop killing their natural predators.

Hunting to me has will always be considered murder..It is a legal way to kill...a legal way for you and every other hunter to suppress the need to kill human beings...your comparisons of killing a million cats, and your hunting hobby is concerning..

People who have great concern for animals do not hunt them down, and shoot them for food, and per one of your past post do not buy dogs from breeders just because they have to have a specific dog to meet their hunting needs...they adopt from shelters, and would never dream of shooting and innocent being just for a meal!!!

Posted by: Dana | December 31, 2007 01:58 PM

Is the freedom of speech only allowed in this blog if it is yours?
I have been to the monestary many of times. It is calm and serene.
What is your problem? With all the mistreatment and dog fights out there being publically shown on t.v. but you are worried about the Monks.
PETA LIES - CHICKENS DIE.
I am sure this blog will not be posted, but all the same it is full of crap like many of your stories of mistreatment.
Thank you for letting me air my opinion if in fact that it is up to your standards.
Roxanne Radabaugh
Moncks Corner, SC

Posted by: Roxanne Radabaugh | January 1, 2008 07:55 AM

Dana,
I am happy for you to continue to adopt animals and get all your food from the grocery store with who knows what in it, but I am going to continue to live to a great extent off of my land and I believe that I will prosper because I do this. Consequently, so will the animals. I am, you are, we are, part of the ecosystem whether we like it or not. It is my goal that the entire ecosystem is healthy (including my family and self).

Posted by: Christopher Cochran MD | January 2, 2008 11:46 AM

Nicole,
I will agree with you that the Monk’s made the right ethical choice to stop their inhumane treatment of animals. Not a one of us has said we do not greatly respect that choice! They did not just stop the egg business the day peta protested though they have a little bit of time to figure out a new plan to humanely and ethically make money with out the suffering of innocent beings. Peta is all about the ethical treatment of animals...Monks are not animals...therefore it is not up to peta because of ethics to help these monks figure out which route in business they will now take. Now on the other hand you are free to get up off of your ass and go help him...I am so sick of hearing that Peta is ultimately responsible for helping to support these people...Peta did what they do stopped animal abuse...as for helping the monks that would be a human welfare issue that is up to each of you as individuals to get involved in..........................

Roxanne do you call peaceful chickens cramped in cages on top of each other peaceful? Yes there are other issues out there that need to dealt with as far as animal abuse goes, and sure there are much worse cases out there...but animal abuse is animal abuse no matter how small or large the extent may be Peta works to stop ALL animal abuse! How is it that Peta lies and chickens die? The Monks were responsible for the chickens dying....spent hens are sent to slaughter once they are of no use anymore how would that be peta’s fault they are not in business with the monks selling eggs.................

Posted by: Dana | January 2, 2008 11:49 AM

Heck ya peta has gone crazy! When there are facilities with over a million hens you decide to pick on a monastary with 20,000 hens. For your information, they would sell the eggs to purchase what few supplies they need then they would donate the rest to less fortunate people. Peta has a lot of funding, why couldnt they help the monks make the hen's living quarters more acceptable? Would they rather have children from poor families go hungry in parts of S.C., than spend some of their protesting money to help both the monks and the less fortunate? I am glad peta is their to protect animals but this is just crazy! And the monks that are being attacked by PETA are vegetarians!

Posted by: tinytim | January 13, 2008 06:31 PM