Instead of accepting the fur coat from the Saudi King he should have told him to release the violated and to be punished with 200 slashes Saudi Woman! But there is one thing which cannot be bought in this dirty little world: courage! And because of this special thing i once again admire PETA and i'm telling her: Nec pluribus impar - nobody is superior to her, neither presidents nor kings because a righteous character cannot be bought!

Posted by: animalfriend | January 22, 2008 04:18 PM

LET'S SEE...
THE ECONOMY IS TAKING A MAJOR NOSE DIVE...
PEOPLE CAN'T AFFORD TO KEEP THEIR HOUSES...
OIL PRICES ARE THE HIGHEST EVER.....
AMERICA'S KIDS ARE DYING IN IRAQ AND AFGANISTAN...
THE REST OF THE WORKD HATE'S THE UNITED STATED GUTS...
AND INGRID ASKS THE PRESIDENT TO THROW OUT HIS ROBE!!!

INCREDIBLY PRICELESS......

Posted by: COMMON SENSE STEVE | January 22, 2008 04:47 PM

I find it funny that PETA only writes letters concerning things with animals. You could have asked Yasir Arafat to meet with Ariel Sharon, but you opted to stop donkey bombs instead. And out of all the things Bush is doing, THIS is what really set you off.

It's hard to admire your stamina, if you actually have any, when you basically trivialize everything else when comparing anything to animal rights.

Posted by: e | January 22, 2008 04:49 PM

whats the point if hes outta here soon?

Posted by: Caboose | January 22, 2008 04:54 PM

Is this really all you people have to do? Are you fucking kidding me? This gesture from the King of Saudi Arabia is a gift to our president who represents the US. Turning down a gift like this would insult the King and the kingdom of Saud. In case you haven't noticed Saudi Arabia is one of our Allies in the Middle East and we aren't the best of allies. President Bush is there to solidify the relations b/t our nations. Again, I understand your concerns, but please think about the bigger picture before you decide to write a letter. The relationship b/t two nations is far more relevent and important than a couple of animals. That is why I like visiting this site, because I never seemed to be amazed by you guys!

Posted by: Kurt K | January 22, 2008 05:09 PM

Look, people, at least we might be able to stop one bad deed of Bush. Yeah, he has lots of stuff to change, but they're hoping that one of them changes already.

Posted by: Yuki | January 22, 2008 05:53 PM

e: you are really a little e with a heavy brain and boring: for the thousandth time: PETA is caring about animal rights! P - People for E - Ethical T - Treatment - A of Animals! also if this is a toughic for you to swallow - you and all the other stupid eternal antibloggers should have got it - once and for always! if you want to help our own species so please feel free to do so - there are thousands of blogs and centers around the world to be joined! got it? that's fine!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: rat king | January 22, 2008 05:59 PM

Kurt K: For you a couple of animals are not important - for me yes! For me they are more important than any president or king! Without presidents and kings the world is less violent but without animals the world is poooooooooooooor! heavy-heart got it?
Green Mile

Posted by: Mister Jingles | January 22, 2008 06:04 PM

Bush is nothing but a pathetic piece of shit. This "TERRORIST" is responsible for the murder of more horses and farm animals than any other so called President before him.
And Kurt, you said a mouth full, when your beloved Pres vetoed Childrens Health Care, the phrase he used was, "THIS MAKES ME RELEVENT".
Both of you are "MORONS"
Peace!!!!!
R.Buddhist

Posted by: Judith, Freedom Fighter for Animals | January 22, 2008 06:12 PM

Animalfriend: there is an interesting parallel to your story: when spanish Premier Aznar visited former French President Jacques Chirac for to ask him when he would join the Irak war he directly answered him: When do think to stop the cruel inhumane bullfights? It is told that Aznar needed three hours to be tranquilized!

Posted by: Le Petit Prince | January 22, 2008 06:20 PM

To respond to kurt k
You know what you don`t have to visit this site if you don`t like it.Peta changed my life. And he should be giving it to the program of giving it to homeless people. Peta does good things for animals.

Posted by: animalrights | January 22, 2008 06:25 PM

Turning down a gift would insult the king? Whoopdef--kingdo! Who cares!

"I find it funny that PETA only writes letters concerning things with animals." Now THAT'S funny. Last time I checked..PETA was an ANIMAL rights' organization.. Please though, tell us all, what have YOU done to better this world in between your complaining?

Wearing fur is cruel and unnecessary. "A nation can be judged by how it treats its animals." -Ghandi. Imagine the example that can be set from a country that has a kind, compassionate president.

Posted by: K | January 22, 2008 06:53 PM

I live in a large, major metropolitan area that is one of the major cities in the U.S. I have never once seen a homeless person wearing a fur. Is this a new program? I've never heard of it, and like I said, I've never seen any evidence of it.

Donating furs you collect to the homeless instead of just destroying them is a really good idea. More programs like that will help to turn your reputation from that of an organization that is only about stunts and politics but that doesn't actually put any of its money towards the real care of animals.

Posted by: Ashes | January 22, 2008 06:58 PM

please tell me ingred, are you in support of murdering loving pittbulls? i have read that you said this, if this is true you are truely no better than those you oppose! please reconsider your position and make public so people know where you really stand! i share my home with a loving beautiful non agressive pittbull!

Posted by: steve drew | January 22, 2008 07:07 PM

Muslim countries are hell on earth for the animals that live in them. We can do without "friends" like the Saudis--they are to blame for as much as the unrest in the middle east as we are. Their government is based on the strictest form of the Muslim religion--Wahabbism (I hope I spelled that right). They aggitate and support terrorists throughout the mideast hoping to overturn more moderate forms of government in the region. Our government has supported this oppressive regime for decades. If we did not depend on their oil, no one in our government would care about what happens with the Saudis at all.

Posted by: Kelley | January 22, 2008 07:14 PM

kurt k and common sense steve....
those couple of animals are at the root of the problem. you see, it is because humans find it so easy to exploit these beings that war exists. if this war is not being prolonged for monetary gain, then tell me why. if one can exploit and kill animals for money, then one would find it easy to do the same to humans. please, get your head out of the orifice in which it does not belong and think for a while about something other than yourselves.
thanks,
Vegancakes

Posted by: Vegancakes | January 22, 2008 07:41 PM

kickass says:

this site sucks for animal lib rights activists!!!
it's openly available for one third each: crazy anti petas bullshit, animal welfare sugar shitters condemning peta and peta activists. the last third is the peta activists.

anti petas have their own web blogging site that rivals security entrance into the CIA!!! Do you think the anti peta site would allow us to have our say??? HELL NO!!!
animal welfare whimps don't have blogging sites so they use this site to spread their disagreements and say peta activists are mean wackos!!!!

listen up, animal lib rights activists!!! we have to take back this site!!! we must be the steamrollers over these parasites!!!
None of them are peta members. none of them donate to peta, but they have the fucking nerve to tell us off and tell us their fucked up opinions!!!!
Fearless Ingrid Newkirk takes on the world! We can take on this site!!! Let's do it for the animals!!!!
I'm not donating one more penny to peta to support a majority rule anti peta, animal welfare opinated site unless we get control of this animal rights site!!!

Posted by: Anonymous | January 22, 2008 08:59 PM

I cannot believe the comments regarding PETA only writing letters relating to animal issues. PETA is an organization that stands up for animals and brings awareness to those who are so disconnected from the nightmarish conditions that people inflict upon animals. Should PETA be responsible for fighting every single cause under the sun? I proudly support PETA for looking out for those who do not have a voice. Thank you, PETA, for continuing to bridge the gap between connectedness and disconnectedness in regard to our relationship with animals.

Posted by: Michael Essi | January 22, 2008 09:48 PM

Kurt, even if you do not think fur is an abomination that should not ever be worn by anyone except for cavemen; have you looked at the Saudi's human rights abuses? Specifically to women? Give me a break. They may be an allie but I am not going to be singing their praises anytime soon. I guess a country where women do not have the same rights as dogs do in this country you cannot expect such forward thinking as not wearing fur. You are right; what are we thinking? Every now and then we need someone like you to set us straight. And while you are using the word fucking, I shall use it for something more useful. Hmmmmmm, "fucking idiot." There, much better use of that word. Oh, and it applies to you. Now I'll go back to my vegan dinner, pet my "companion" animal, dream of Bush's departure from office and recycle my diet coke cans. You are right, the relationship between two countries is more important in the long run but sometimes it pays to think about who you are calling a "friend." And as to why. Oh, wait; I forgot. Oil. I need to stop. I am rambling and I am certain not sounding nearly as well educated or as intelligent as you. Of course, I pale in comparison. After all, only idiots like me go to shitty colleges like Yale. And on that note; I probably shouldn't have called you an idiot. But I can't help it! You had me feeling emotional in an angry, left wing, liberal, bra burning, crazy animal activist kind of way.

Posted by: Lori | January 22, 2008 10:19 PM

To "e", Kurt K and all the inevitable clueless people out there: THIS IS AN ANIMAL RIGHTS organization. This IS what we do! This is way more than about "a couple of animals". Ironically, PETA and its supporters ARE looking at the bigger picture by condemning Bush for this act - because this is representative of what is going on around the world, and has implications for MILLIONS of animals.

People like you are pathetic, and will NEVER change your anti-animal views - you are not on this site for information nor enlightenment. You do NOT "understand" our concerns, and you are the ones making light of the very serious issue of ANIMAL ABUSE. You clearly have nothing better to do, and are not apparently doing anything to help this world in any other ways, whether it involves humans or non-human animals.

If you want to help the world in other ways, no one would criticize you for that - but don't you fucking DARE criticize the compassionate, selfless people who work tirelessly, for NO profit, to help animals in need!!!!!!

Congratulations PETA on another excellent letter.

Posted by: Michele | January 22, 2008 10:40 PM

What amazes me most here is the number of the comments suggesting, with no explanation, as if it were self-evident, that "human problems must come first."

For the ten millionth time, the entire point of animal rights is to fight our arbitrarily-ingrained prejudice against taking the suffering of nonhuman animals seriously: a prejudice called speciesism.

By no fault of our own, we have been taught to believe, since we were too young to reflect on it, that all of the other species are there for us to use - that they are our property - and that their suffering, even when it is as intense as ours, counts for almost nothing when it clashes with our most trivial interests. That is what animal rights is fighting against.

This, I think, is more-or-less what animal rights is all about (in video form!):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADhNch30Img

(Hey, somebody at PETA should get permission to put that video on PETA's "why animal rights" page, or somewhere really, really, really prominent. Seriously!)

And if you want more, here is the essay that convinced Ingrid Newkirk to start PETA:

http://www.peta.org/about/animallib-singer.asp

So, "Common Sense Steve" and "Kurt K," and everyone with similar claims, even if you do not accept everything about animal rights, it should be clear that the arguments are too strong to dismiss without any explanation.

Posted by: Mark | January 22, 2008 10:46 PM

Um... Peta isn't a political organization. I'm sure everybody has a lot to say about world issues that don't concern animals, but it would be a tad irrelevant for them to post that on this site.

Also, George represents our country and I think it would be more beneficial to our relationship with many other places if he weren't wearing flesh.

Just my two cents.

Posted by: HH | January 23, 2008 12:07 AM

I have rescued many animals throughout the years from shelters,vets,in my town and from people just dumping them at my door. Our dog I just saw standing on a highway with a semi truck headed right at him. I called him and he came.It was very close! Come to find out he is an American Foxhound(which I didn't know at the time, he was just a dog that needed help). He had been beaten severely and starved beyond belief. I took him home, fed him and took him to the vet. I tried to find the owner but couldn't(If I had found him I would have had him arrested)! He was young but had a hard life.He took to my son and has been with us for 5 years and get the best of care and loves the cats. He loves Beneful food and has preventative flea and tick treatments and now won't even leave the yard unless taken in the van to the vet (We have a BIG yard). He is very healthy and happy. He is a big dog which I wasn't exactly expecting but that's OK). He sleeps with my son,He takes his pillow and my son uses him as a pillow. It's by choice. That way they both know if one of them moves. (now 15) every night and would literally die before anyone would get in to hurt us. He is the best dog we could ever hope for and He has,( Our dog) has adopted a husky that now lives with us too. Both of our dogs appreciate everything we give them. Even a cheap toy or just a bag of dog treats.
When you save a pet they appreciate any little thing you do for them. Why would anyone ever buy a pet because they have a predagree? It doesn't make them better. The rescues appreciate it so much more.
My son and I both love both dogs and the 2 cats beyond belief. They are great.Plus we have gotten all of them fixed so we don't add to the unwanted population.
People should save a pet rather than add to the problem. I don't see why they would want a purebred. It's not a big deal and they love you as much as you love them no matter what.
Save them,keep them and protect them from everything you can. I even had a cat that lived to be 22 years old before he died of old age.I still miss him and loved him and he was one I saved. They need us.
Plus,
I would NEVER wear real fur! Even as a kid I wouldn't wear a jacket my mom wanted to buy me because it had rabbit fur on it. She is now antifur too. Even before it was wide spread I refused to wear real fur and my parents now agree.Both of my kids have been raised not to wear fur and stick to it. I'm proud of them!
I don't care what anyone else does but my choice is NO FUR!!!!!That's it. If you have no problem with fur that's your choice but mine and my kids is to be fur free.

Posted by: Tee | January 23, 2008 02:18 AM

The president is a f*ckhead anyway.
He doesnt realize (even though his mother does) what the animals go through!

somebody needs to sit him down and have him talk to his mom!

Posted by: amber Falobas | January 23, 2008 08:43 AM

To those of you who think Peta should be focusing on the war in Iraq and the housing market...are you kidding me? Peta is an organization for animals, not housing stats. Just because there are other problems in this world doesn't mean the animals have suddenly stopped being mistreated and abused. They STILL matter, regardless of what else is going on. The moment Peta takes their eyes away from the suffering of all of this world's creatures, a life will be lost that could have been saved. So SHAME ON YOU! You should STAND UP and do something for what YOUY believe in. Peta IS! An adult with a concious mind has to be aware that although there are tragedies everywhere in this world, when you pick your battle you fight it to the bloody end!

Posted by: Cali | January 23, 2008 08:44 AM

kickAss gives A's to:

e, what part of petA don't you get????? hint: A is for Animals. talking about funny.....want a good belly laugh??? terrorists plant bombs on Animals to kill people. yeah A real trivial Animal rights comparison!!!!

common shit steve, what part of petA don't you get??? hint: A is for Animals!!!
hint: you are on the wrong site Asshole!!!!!

kurt k, what part of petA don't you get??? hint: A is for Animals.
what part of terrorists born and bred in SA don't you get??? what part of SA sucking up our money for oil don't you get??? what part of SA not allowing Airspace to American pilates during the war don't you get??? Allies my Ass!!!!! you are on the wrong site bud, or A terrorist sympathizer!!!! A for Amazing!!!!

Posted by: kickass | January 23, 2008 09:08 AM

To Common Sense Steve and "e":
To speak up for animals on a PETA blog doesn't mean that we aren't sensitive to the other problems the world is facing or that we don't care about people. The fact is, most of us here care a great deal about ALL living beings, human AND animal, but since the animals don't get a lot of attention elsewhere, we focus on them. Why is that so hard to understand? And I think PETA'S suggestion to "W" to donate the fur coat is a great one. As for the Saudi's, as long as we are relying on their exports (oil), we will be "friends" with the Saudis, and have to put up with their OTHER exports as well (Osama Bin Laden and company.) Until we rid ourselves of dependence upon oil and gasoline, the Saudis will be part of our everyday lives, like it or not. Since I know that, I devote my time to the animals and the environment, who pay the price for the ecological disasters we inflict on the planet. Bush could do ONE small thing for animals, the environment AND for people by donating that ridiculous coat.

Posted by: Susannah S | January 23, 2008 10:32 AM

I cannot begin to enumerate how abusive, oppressive and violent the Saudi Arabian regime is. Please read history; that's my advice to the animal haters/abusers/users. Waiting for human on human atrocities to end in order to help animals is ridiculous. Other social movements went on with their agenda irregardless of loud vocal criticism, otherwise, for example, women would still be chattel in the USA. Oh, by the way, women are chattel in SA. These pompous violent SA fools are not really allies; they like USA money that's all. SA's cult-like Islam does not allow religous freedom to others. Christians cannot wear crosses on chains in public nor can carry their Bibles (visibly) to church either. Bush should not be wearing this item composed of the skins of brutalized, murdered animals just as his Mom decided previously as First Lady. The Saudis disallowing American pilots to fly in "their" space does not convey "ally" material. The USA needs to make the effort to not rely too much on oil so that the $$$$ importance of these bastards will diminish.
If you fools hate animals and PETA so much, well, why don't you just go away. Animals matter to me. Only cowards take satisfaction in abusing/killing/wearing animals. It takes courage and tenacity to fight the good fight for the voiceless creatures.
Animal welfarists, go to HSUS, ASPCA WSPA, or IFAW for example. They speak your language---SOFT! But don't criticize abolitionists like myself who want to end the oppression of all animals. The majority of AW groups serve animals at their functions. Something is very wrong with this picture!

Posted by: Ana | January 23, 2008 11:15 AM

I don't remember ever saying anything good about Saudi Arabia in my last post. I pointed out that insulting the leader of another country, who has very different beliefs than we do, is not a smart thing right now. If Pres. Bush turned down that fur coat (by the way, I dislike killing animals for clothing), it would have sent a message across the Saudi Arabia that "once again, the US thinks they are better than us!" We are trying to smooth over some of our differences with the Mid East countries by respecting their cultures. Why do you think we are tring to spread democracy around the Mid East? So orginizations like PETA can exist and fight for whatever cause they want. Right now the people of those countries don't have that luxury that we do!
Lori, I forgive you for calling me an idiot, I understand your passion and your points, please try to understand mine.
Kickass, don't ever accuse me of being a Terrorist Sympathizer! I despise terrorism and all who practice it!

Posted by: Kurt K | January 23, 2008 11:52 AM

Kurt K: your statements are bizarre: first of all i was reading on one of the last blogs your layout concerning GOD's image: please know that the original bible text tells us that man is created in GOD's shadow - not his image! The today's translation is wrong - and with a very clear purpose: like this people think that they got a direct proof and permission for animal abuse! and furthermore one of the 10 Commandments tells us 'not to make any image from all what's in the see, on earth and in the sky' - this means no judgement over God and his creation and what's in their hearts! second you are pretending that animals don't pray to GOD! you don't know this! the human being is not omni-scient - hence doesn't know everything! Just God knows everything! your statements are completely respectless towards HIS personal property and creation! third there is not just the christian religion but many other much older and for my personal taste much smarter-ones! fourth: JESUS WAS A VEGETARIAN and here is the proof: when one of his apostles baptised the famous Ethiopian, this-one turned back to his country and still nowadays we find the first and largest christian-vegetarian society on this planet there in Ethiopia! Every kind of species are living free together with them - and they live with almost no technology like at the times of Christ himself - go to find them and have a look! and something else: unfortunately the today's bible as it is - isn't anymore in it's original state but many things were and are continuously removed and translated in wrong words! one famous example is the 'ox-sting' as God talked to Paul on his way to Damascus! modern translators don't know anymore what's an ox-sting - but me i know it because in the Sanskrit-texts God is also said to have one and they didn't take the whole thing out because they are used to a life on the countryside!!! and so on - so just i want to tell you this: if you want to eat meat and to go out for hunting this is your business - but please don't try to mislead the innocent PETA-lambs!

Posted by: Don Quijote | January 23, 2008 12:22 PM

Your all talking bollocks if the U.S.A. had not stopped the Brits during the Suez crisis in the 50's from sorting out the Middle East., we would not have these problems today, and soldiers dying for fuck all in the Middle East.

Posted by: keith | January 23, 2008 01:30 PM

DEAR TEE!
TOTALLY AGREE, I HAVE 5 DOGS AND RUN A PET RESCUE IN KY!

Posted by: VICI | January 23, 2008 02:01 PM

I think we all agree that there are major issues that President Bush needs to be taking care of right now: War in Iraq, Iran, the economy, oil prices, and so forth.

But just because he has these major issues to take care of does not mean that he is excused from all of his decision making skills.

For example, if President Bush went around kicking and abusing his dogs, would you say leave him alone since he has Iraq to worry about?

Lets say he starts being a neglectful husband, would you say leave him alone since he has oil prices and interest rates to worry about.

No! He is still responsible for being a human being. He is still expected to make good and sound decisions with EVERYTHING in his life and in his office no matter how big or small the issue may be. Especially when the whole world is looking at him.

Posted by: Jaclyn | January 23, 2008 02:24 PM

this message is for tee, did you say beneful?!... STILL gettin this jink! after the pet food recall, STILL buyin junk (food) from china.. try wysong.net, H U G E ! companys are only in it for the money.

Posted by: indycar01 | January 23, 2008 02:33 PM

ahaha I LOVE Dan Mathew's comment, LOL. He has such a great sense of humor - a vital component of being an advocate who must absorb information about people still skinning sentient beings alive.

I'm surprised by several of the posts here condeming PETA for remaining consistent with their mission. Peta's mission is to Fight Animal Abuse around the World, not:

Change oil prices
Change the world's opinion about American politics
Feed the poor, starving and homeless people of the world (although they are clothing them, just for good measure)
Arrange to bring our soldiers home
Help people pay for the mortgages

No...none of these missions are a part of PETA's mission statement which is, once again, to fight animal abuse worldwide.

Do you go to Amnesty International and tell them they are ridiculous for helping clean up psych hospitals in China when there are WARS GOING ON!!?? I think not. You respect them for doing their job - even though it has nothing to do with putting your child through college.

Let organizations be consistent - specialization is what makes us unique, brilliant and efficient.

With all of this said - Well Done PETA for always remaining on the forefront of your chosen mission and thank you for always being strong enough to speak to even the world's most 'powerful' people about issues other people might not have the stamina or time for or even possibly trivialize.

Furthermore,

The beef industry has contributed to more American deaths than all the wars of this century, all natural disasters, and all automobile accidents combined. If beef is your idea of 'real food for real people,' you'd better live real close to a real good hospital.

Neal D. Barnard, M.D., President, Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine. Washington, D.C.

About 2,000 pounds of grains must be supplied to livestock in order to produce enough meat and other livestock products to support a person for a year, whereas 400 pounds of grain eaten directly will support a person for a year. Thus, a given quantity of grain eaten directly will feed 5 times as many people as it will if it is eaten indirectly by humans in the form of livestock products....

M.E. Ensminger, PH.D.

So Peta's mission DOES reach us all, but again: they are not here to offer mortgages or fight oil policy. There are other people to approach about these important topics.

Simply put, Peta is here to fight animal abuse and they do a damn good job at achieving this mission.

Posted by: holly | January 23, 2008 02:43 PM

Wow, you guys amaze me—the level of heartfelt passion, intelligence and eloquence expressed by the ARA's here is astounding. You've all condensed very beautifully exactly how I feel.

Thanks for the link, Mark.

Michele, you sound very pissed off. I like it :).

Kickass,

Love your edge—you seem to be the proud owner of the latest model of Acme Bullshit Detector. It'll need a good warranty to survive on this blog.

Posted by: Mike Quinoa | January 23, 2008 03:00 PM

I am just speechless that PETA is wasting their time on this.

For the record, the protection of wildlife is a top priority for me. All fur should be banned permanently. So don't accuse me of caring about humans more than animals.

My only point is, Bush is planning to drill in the Arctic and he is currently banning scientists like myself from using the term global warming and is going to bar us from getting information from government organizations like NOAA about global climate change.

Bush would just as soon blow up all of your mothers and children, and pets. Do you really think he's even going to ever see this letter?

Anyone who thinks he is going to care about an animal is insane. He's a complete psychopath. Why not write a letter to a serial killer and ask him to have compassion for the people who he murdered?

I think PETA is doing incredible work with so many things, they should drop the letter writing to Bush. It's a waste of time.

Posted by: Maya, CVT | January 23, 2008 03:40 PM

Ok, I can understand some peoples anger here. I know that Bush sucks as a president. The economy is horrible espeically here in Southwest FL where I live. Everyone is suffering, but let's keep in mind what PETA is everybody. They are here for animal rights. NOT the ECONOMY, NOT THE GAS PRICES , AND NOT THE WAR. Granted, those are really important issues and I'm in total agreance with that (sorry if misspelled that) but PETA is here to worry ANIMALS which is really important too.

Posted by: Ashley | January 23, 2008 04:51 PM

Tee- Ur Awesome

And Maya-

That is some scary stuff you said. Global warming is scary enough and now after waht you said about Bush, I'm mortified. I swear he must be the anti-christ.

Posted by: Ashley | January 23, 2008 05:11 PM

Judith

You dont get it do you?

Bush is only an Idiotic figurehead, its Cheyney and all of the Bush "Sidekicks" who wielf true power.

Posted by: Caboose | January 23, 2008 07:23 PM

I cant wait to see how this turns out!

Posted by: Sarah | January 24, 2008 08:28 AM

I saw an article about this letter in the Washington Post, which has a readership of nearly 1 million people. I imagine this letter to Bush took about an hour or two to write and fax. That's about two hours of effort to reach 1 million people with an important message about how animals are treated on fur farms. I doubt anyone complaining on this blog is using their time as effectively to help anyone, human or animal.

Posted by: Allen | January 24, 2008 08:43 AM

First of all, I have been a PETA supporter for several years, now. And I am sick & tired of idiots who claim that if you care about animals, you don't care about people. That is beyond stupid, even here in Texas ! There are many human rights groups, not to mention the fact that our *laws* are going to take an act of violence against a person more seriuously that that of an animal. PETA *has* to speak out for animals, because, obviously, they can't speak up for them selves.
I also happen to belong to Amnesty International (local 23, here in Houston) Does that meet with your approval ? Or do you also object to any concern shown for the well being of foreigners as apposed to Americans ?
Look, there's a cornucopia of opportunities to work for justice and protect *all* life forms from violence and suffering. If *you* truly care as much as you claim to, (I am talking to those dissing PETA now) why don't *you* do something ? Or is it easier just to sit on your ignorant, hypocritical butts and attack those who are trying to make a difference ?

Posted by: Juli Kring | January 24, 2008 09:03 AM

Hello Maya!!

I totally agree with you that Bush is a completely apathetic fool but I don't think writing to him is a complete waste of time. His administration still needs to know that he is unethical in accepting a gift that represents violence, cruelty and pain to sentient beings. If Bush had made an error in judgement in giving a gift that would slightly offend Islam, he and the rest of the world would hear of it in volumes and I will conjecture not so politely as well. Bush would give his apologies and choose a suitable gift. The fur is unsuitable and unethical and does not need to be accepted. Another example I will give is that of the German Women's Peace Group that begged Kaiser Wilhelm to refrain from going to war. You can suggest that their words fell on deaf ears and perhaps it did. But the Kaiser knew how these women felt about the war irregardless of his decision. Of course, we all know that WWI erupted and the rest is history. ( The Kaiser was a military man and only wore military uniforms every day of his life)
I do so wholeheartedly agree with your pov regarding free living animals. Their environment needs to be protected and people also need to consider the ill effects of an ever-growing human population. Human encroachment, destruction of the environment, over-development (read $$$$$), building more malls, hunting and the fur industry has taken a horrible toll on these creatures living in the wild. Bush wants to destroy the last pristine frontier left in the USA---ALASKA!!!! Horrible!! This madman and his cronies need to be stopped. Please lets unite our voices and tenacity and fight this atrocity----the possible eradication of these unique creatures! Maya, lead the way!!!:) Peace and blessings to you!

Posted by: Ana | January 24, 2008 10:45 AM

kickass says:

For the Animals,
mighty damn proud of the animal rights steamrollers on this round!
WAY TO GO!!!!!!!!!

mike quinoa, cool! yep....kickass has a lifetime guaranteed Acme Bullshit Detector...sight, hearing, always picks up on bullshitters anywhere, any time!!! kickass ABD can also smell the bullshitters on this site 'cause their comments stink!!!!!!

Posted by: kickass | January 24, 2008 11:02 AM

Hi Maya,

I don't think writing this letter qualifies as wasted time.

It should take no more than a few minutes to type out this letter and a few more to proof the letter. So, to be generous with time, say it took a little over an hour to type and send this letter. Definitely not wasted time.

Will this letter get Bush to see the light and change his ways? No. But it doesn't mean that Peta should not reach out to people that are "hard-headed" or "set in their ways."

I understand your strong feelings. I got so angry when a video was posted on this blog in which Bush was asked a question related to Peta and his ever so "smart" response was something to do with wanting to eat bacon. I can't tell you how proud I felt of our President when his answer was a lame, non related response as wanting to eat bacon.

Atleast the letter is circulating and hopefully it lets people know that no one should wear fur, and that no one includes people from the President down to someone like me, and obviously excludes the homeless.

I do agree with you on the global warming issues. I recently saw a show (60 minutes maybe?) on the govt's heavy censorhip of words when relating to global warming. They interviewed several researchers that quit working for the White House because they were not allowed to say how bad global warming really is. The show said that Cooney, the chief of staff for enviromental quality for the White House isn't even a scientist. He's a lawyer. Yet he gets to do all the final "editing" on anything related to global warming.

Posted by: Jaclyn | January 24, 2008 11:58 AM

Yeah, kickass, you can't beat Acme for high quality products!

Caboose,

I think they all kiss corporate ass.

Posted by: Mike Quinoa | January 24, 2008 04:25 PM

Caboose,
You need to do a little more reading about Bush, leader of the sheeple.
Yes it was Cheney and Burns that wanted to start killing the wild horses again.
In 1971 we were thrilled when a Act of protection was signed
for the horses.
in 2000 when the sheeple voted in you know who, Cheney and Burns found a loophole
allowing all of the horses, donkeys etc to be killed. Bush signed that.
A new bill past last year but the horses are still disappering.
Please go to VanityFair.com and read a really great article called "Bush's Wild Mustang Slaughter". Its the one with George Clooney on the cover.
I GET IT.
Make no doubt about that.
Because, if Bush is going to be getting blood money from somewhere, he wants to know how to cover his ass.
BUSH, CHENEY and BURNS all BATHE IN BLOOD.
Peace!!!
RB

Posted by: Judith, Freedom Fighter for Animals | January 24, 2008 05:01 PM

Maybe the bush man needs to watch the videos and see what the hells he is wearing,and then maybe he would see the that fur was alive the whole time they where skining it so he coulld look good and not hurt the kings feelings,fuck the kings feeling.No one cares about what those poor animals felt when they where ripping there skins off.Think about that people.Take a look at your dog or cat and just think if he or she where going threw that.

Posted by: susan bren | January 24, 2008 08:19 PM

Kurt K needs to educate himself about US relations with Saudi Arabia. We are in the oil business together. The Saudis could care less about our rights. Read up on the politics of the US & the Middle East! And yes surprisingly enough PETA deals with animal rights not politics. Thus the name PETA. Animals do have rights as well as Humans.

Posted by: Fionuala | January 24, 2008 08:58 PM

Hi Ashley! Yes, it is extremely scary but hopefully the time is coming to toss his butt out of the White House! We truly can't afford to let this dictator stay there for one more second. I'm with you, sister.

Thank you Ana, and like you I am an optimist and I think that even the most hard headed people may open their hearts one day, so I agree we should never stop trying, ever. Many blessings ;)

Hey Jacklyn! Yes I agree with you, we should never give up completely, and yes the poor poor polar bears are in so much trouble, and the censorship situation is just as scary as the wiretapping. Very sinister. Let's hope we're done with this joker soon! ;)

Posted by: Maya, C.V.T. | January 24, 2008 10:23 PM

hey, im not going to argue with any of the shitty headed anti peta people commenting, but this site is for people who like animals, obviosly your mothers havent told you any better, if you don't like animal rights quit sitting on your butt arguing to peta people and go exercise.

Posted by: erica | January 25, 2008 03:12 PM

Judith

Dont you mean they bathe in OIL?

Posted by: Caboose | January 25, 2008 05:23 PM

Fionuala
When did I say anything about Saudi Arabia caring about our rights? Did you even read what I posted or did you read what everybody said about me and then just piled on. All i said was I thought it was wrong to critisize Pres. Bush for accepting a gift from another foreign dignitary. It really doesn't matter where the foreign dignitary is from, it is just common curtosy to be polite to others. What did you want Bush to do, throw the coat down and say "I can't accept this"? The point I was try to make was I think there is a bigger picture here than a fur coat. Whether fur is wrong pales in comparison in this case. A countries foriegn relations is more important.

Posted by: Kurt K | January 25, 2008 07:01 PM

Does anyone know if Peta is supporting any of the Presidential Candidates? And, which candidates? Thanks, I'm a huge animal supporter and that's my number one issue...

Posted by: Brooke W | January 28, 2008 10:43 AM

I totally agree with
you Tee!

I read your statement &
it was beautiful &
touching. We had Felix
a male black & white cat
for over 14 years & he died of
old age. Felix has been passed away for 3 years now & I still miss him & think about him- he was the best! Never scratched or bit me or our 10 year old son once, when my son was born, I worried how Felix would respond to him, I had nothing to worry about! He loved my son! Felix was a stray. There are so many animals out there needing a good home, why buy one just because it has a "pedi-gree"

Michelle
Southern California

Posted by: Michelle Warren | January 31, 2008 07:53 PM

I really don't see what everyone is FREAKING OUT about. it was a gift, no it was a gesture to our country from theirs. and by not accepting this gesture he would be insulting the Saudi King Abdullah, and his culture. we have to be aware that the world is full of people of differnt cultures and we don't all see the world the same way. im sure none of you have been in any Saudi's shoes so you can't say that you understand 100%. we should be angry at people for wearing fur (which is till used by Inuit tribes in the arctic), we should be angry with the people who farm animals for their fur cruely and inhumanly. How do we know that the fur coat wasn't made 20 years ago? do you honestly think that we kill the animals for that coat before he got on the plane? you just have to think about things before, i think someone already mentioned it, write a letter demanding the president of our country (which is a very hard and stressful job, and you should give him more credit, even thou you may hate him) to get ride of a gift that will strengthen our relations with a middle eastern country.

oh and by the way. some said that with out kings or presidents there would be less violence.. that is pretty ignorant for someone to even say that... why don't you read a history book it will open your eyes.

Posted by: Jack | January 31, 2008 08:25 PM

I'm inspired by your campaignes, PETA! Now I don't feel alone in my opinions and values.
Thanks for that,
C.Maestro

Posted by: Cecilia Maestro | February 1, 2008 07:52 AM

Nicely said Jack! I wrote something similar awhile back, but it is good see someone else is seeing the big picture here!

Posted by: Kurt K | February 1, 2008 11:14 AM

It is not ethical or acceptable,by genaral standards,to agree to skin animals even to cloth the poor.
Fur should not be worn as it shows a person's bad character and cold-hearted indifference.
Now that the animal is skinned,don't look at its fur.
Its not right to say that the poor have an excuse to wear fur.

Posted by: kel | February 3, 2008 10:24 AM

Tell that to a person who is freezing cold!

Posted by: Kurt K | February 4, 2008 03:40 PM

KurtK: In light of your concern, perhaps you could offer your skin, or the skin of your child, to keep that poor homeless person warm. No?? Then don't be volunteering the flesh of someone else.

Posted by: Antigone1000 | February 6, 2008 06:37 PM

Antigone
Why so mean? First of all my skin wouldn't be as warm as, say a beaver or mink, I don't have fur. Secondly, I didn't voluteer the flesh,as you put it. If you read back through the posts you would know that the discussion started when someone asked what they do with old fur coats? Somebody then said they should give them to the poor since they could be used for good. Next, somebody said it was wrong to use fur no matter what the circumstance. And all I said was "tell that to a person who is freezing cold!"
You see, I didn't say go and kill millions of animals to keep the poor from freezing. I said we might as well use what we have already available for the homeless.
Is there something wrong with that, to help a fellow human stay warm?

Posted by: Kurt K | February 7, 2008 12:37 PM

KurtK: Well, how about this. Why don't we let people look at child porn, provided they did not create it? After all--it already exists, why not let someone get some enjoyment out of it? Because it represents suffering and mistreatment experienced by someone, right??

Posted by: Antigone1000 | February 7, 2008 07:10 PM

Antigone
You have got to be the most negative person I have ever experienced. You always draw correltations with the bad side of humanity.
The difference b/t what I was suggesting and you just ranted about, is my idea would benefit a cold person. You suggest exploiting children to pedaphiles. That is wrong beyond in every way.
The fact is, these old fur coats exsist. If you could use them to benefit people who really need them why wouldn't you. This way the animal didn't die in vain. At least in death the animal is helping a fellow "animal".
Seems to me you don't like MAN!

Posted by: Kurt K | February 8, 2008 01:03 PM

KurtK: That is exactly what I am suggesting. The pedophile needs a sexual outlet, why not let him get one from already-existing child porn? That way, the child was not exploited in vain and it will prevent the pedophile from exploiting another child, thereby helping a fellow "child." Yeh--sounds like we are making the exact same argument.....

Posted by: Antigone1000 | February 9, 2008 02:35 PM

Antigone, just so we are clear here, I do not support killing animals for their fur! Having said that, a poor person is not a criminal, he is just cold. A pedophile is a criminal and needs to be stopped and arrested.
Like I said, I see the correlation, but I fail to see the comparison. One is doing good, the other is doing bad!

Posted by: Kurt K | February 10, 2008 05:58 PM

KurtK: If you are talking about child porn that is already in existence and fur coats that are already in existence, they are equal. I am not suggesting that we exploit children, just that the existing porn not go to waste. There is no "good" in a fur coat, just a ton of suffering. In light of all the alternatives we have to keep warm, I don't see any reason we need to give anyone fur.

Posted by: Antigone1000 | February 11, 2008 06:08 PM

Antigone,
This is going nowhere, you don't want to understand my point!

Posted by: Kurt K | February 13, 2008 09:31 PM

Kurt K: I understand your point--the animal is already dead, why not benefit someone?? Same argument I made previously--the child has already been molested, why not benefit someone? You always start from the premise that animal abuse is okay, whereas I start from the premise that it is NOT okay. As child abuse is not okay, so animal abuse is not okay.

Posted by: Antigone1000 | February 14, 2008 07:25 PM

Kurt K: I find them extremely comparable but, since you cannot make the connection, I'll give you another scenario. Let's say that a poor person has no shoes, but there happen to be a pair of shoes laying around that were made from a Jewish person in a concentration camp. Well--the Jewish person IS already dead, and this poor homeless person IS shoeless....... Do you see the similarity now??

Posted by: Antigone1000 | February 20, 2008 06:43 PM

Antigone
Okay, givin that scenario, I would suggest the shoes be put in the Holocaust Museum in D.C. Yet again your hypotheticals are the extreme type that involve one of the worst human tragedies of all time. This is going back to the argument that the slaughter of animals is the "same" as the Holocaust. I don't agree.
Back to the original arguement, if the shoes would help a poor person in need of a good pair of shoes, I would definitely say let them have the shoes. At least in the end the shoes benefited some one in need. I would bet that person who made the shoes would agree. Except if the person recieving the shoes turned out to be a skin head.

Posted by: Kurt K | February 21, 2008 07:22 PM

Kurt K: I think you would get quite a bit of opposition in letting anyone use shoes made of humans. Look how many people (yourself, included, I believe) wrote in support of DEAD people over LIVING animals (KFC Graveyard blog). You couldn't deal with a controversial sentiment on a tombstone, so don't say that you would allow a poor person to wear shoes made of a human so that you can make your argument seem more legitimate. In light of your other posts, it is obvious that you are just being a hypocrite.

Posted by: Antigone1000 | February 22, 2008 07:02 PM

Antigone,
I must have misread your previouis post about the shoes. I thought you meant shoes made by a Jewish prisoner. I didn't know you meant shoes made of a Jewish prisoner. In that case then I would not want those shoes to be used.
I don't know where I have been a hypocrite, I have always said that I am for the needs of humans over the needs of animals.
Why won't you acknowledge me statements against the fur industry? I am not for that business, I have said that many times. In this case, I do think it is unecessary and cruel to kill an animal only for its fur.
Again, I still think the Holocaust and the fur industry are light years apart and the shouldn't be compared to one another. Human suffering to me is the most important issue that this world faces.

Posted by: Kurt K | February 25, 2008 01:02 PM

Kurt K: It is easy for you to look lightly upon the suffering of animals when you know you will never experience it personally. If you were forced to endure the horrors of the slaughterhouse, you would understand that the species of the victim does not affect the level of suffering, and that human suffering and animal suffering are EXACTLY EQUAL in the eyes of the victim. Your opinion about fur is irrelevant because it just illustrates your belief that it is appropriate for you to determine what suffering is acceptable and what is not. That decision is rightly only left to the sufferer, not someone watching from the sidelines.

Posted by: Antigone1000 | February 26, 2008 08:19 PM