yeah, humane petrochemical alts

Posted by: Caboose | January 4, 2008 04:06 PM

Oh, this is wonderful! It's always excellent to know that even in a poor country like India that's struggling with its HUMAN rights, some people can still find the time to stick up for rights of animals.
:-)

Posted by: Mystique Makepeace | January 4, 2008 04:08 PM

I have no respect for people that think human and animal rights have to be exclusive of each other. What ignorance and selfishness.

Posted by: Marcy | January 4, 2008 04:30 PM

If the police are confused what does that say about the effectiveness of the campaign?

Posted by: rojo | January 4, 2008 05:20 PM

Well, the demonstration was covered by pretty much every major Indian newspaper, many of which ran extensive interviews with PETA India staffers about the leather industry, so I would say it was pretty effective. :)

Posted by: Jack | January 4, 2008 05:24 PM

how do they not get that? still, good job on educating people

Posted by: rose | January 4, 2008 05:55 PM

you told us the police were confused,so now I take it newspaper reading people are too.

Posted by: rojo | January 4, 2008 06:13 PM

Hi Jack, I admit I can't read Hindi, but a search of several Indian newspapers(120 odd in all) in English failed to mention this demo. Perhaps you could provide some links.

Thanks

Posted by: rojo | January 4, 2008 07:22 PM

Caboose,

What do you do to cow skin so it won't decompose?

Posted by: Mike Quinoa | January 4, 2008 07:24 PM

Caboose, leather is very harmful to the environment and to human health. Animal skins naturally decay, therefore leather has to be treated (tanned) with highly toxic chemicals to preserve it.

I've found quality faux leather belts and boots to be longer-lasting than leather, which is also a plus.

There are also "green" leather alternatives, such as hemp and recycled bicycle tires.

Posted by: AndyJ | January 4, 2008 09:33 PM

Animals feel pain just as acutely as humans. Humans contribute more to animal pain than they do to human pain. Much animal cruelty comes from people hiding from the truth or not knowing the truth.
Though fighting for animal rights and human rights is not mutually exclusive, it can be arguable that fighting for animal rights is even MORE imperative. Though, as a closet speciest i focus more on human rights...

Posted by: Brad | January 4, 2008 10:35 PM

Agreed, Marcy. Human rights ARE animal rights.

Posted by: Canaduck | January 5, 2008 02:03 AM

Hahaha, they're confused? About what?

Posted by: K | January 5, 2008 06:09 AM

Marcy,

"The question is not, Can they reason?, nor Can they talk? but, Can they suffer?" --Jeremy Bentham

Posted by: K | January 5, 2008 06:38 AM

I have to say PETA's campaigns are cool, but people get confused, and others get amused. Confusion and Amusement is not going to get it into peoples heads. They are just going to laugh and thinks its ridiculous and just let it pass. They will not take it seriously.

Posted by: Stephanie | January 5, 2008 11:56 AM

Animals deserve the same rights as humans. They are living, breathing, feeling, thinking, dreaming creatures just like us! Inflicting pain upon them is morally wrong! Humans are animals too. Human rights should not be seperated from animal rights. We should all have the right to live without pain or suffering.

Posted by: Aleasha | January 5, 2008 02:37 PM

What's all this "with all the suffering people, why do we care about animals"? We care about animals for the same reason we care about people. They feel.

Posted by: Martin | January 5, 2008 07:34 PM

I LOVE it!! Keep up the good work India protesters.

Please help the police not be so confused!

Peace&Love

Posted by: Bri'gette | January 5, 2008 10:57 PM

How is that confusing? The sign says "leather is murder." A cow is half skinned with blood everywhere.

And how is it amusing? How is a cow with half its skin cut off amusing?

Quit running from your guilt and stop contributing to the holocaust of animals.

Posted by: Brad | January 5, 2008 11:42 PM

um ever consider that not everyone in india can read/speak english? or that the reason they're confused stems from being involved in a culture where discussions of animal mistreatment aren't prevalent? yeah...respect for animals is important. so is respect for cultures/languages other than your own. making fun of people for not understanding a demonstration in a foreign language is not part of this respect.

Posted by: emily | January 6, 2008 05:20 AM

i personally only wear real fur and real leather, honestly they are animals and are not on our human level they should not require the same rights you are all crazy!

Posted by: kyle | January 6, 2008 02:02 PM

hahahahahaha wow that second picture is so funny!!! Good job to those guys for keeping up the protest and not busting out laughing! lol

Posted by: Natalie | January 6, 2008 07:53 PM

and ancient techniques of processing?

Posted by: Caboose | January 6, 2008 08:49 PM

Aleasha i don't think animals deserve the same rights as humans do if that were the case why not make the animals get jobs and pay taxes and fight the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that i have been fighting for the past six years animals do not deserve the same rights as humans now i don't believe in letting animals suffer needlessly and i believe that the government of the U.S.A has put in action every means possible to ensure that animals get a decent life whether they are destined to become food or companion animals.

Posted by: sapper | January 6, 2008 10:36 PM

I am ashamed as a Hindu Brahmin,land of my ancestors,does allow such cruel and hideous barbarity of animal slaughter for its skin for fashion,foot wear,handbags etc etc.It is a crying shame that Hitler,a vegetarian who also claimed to be Aryan,did not team up Lord Dowding of Royal Airforce,(who saved Britain in the air war)and put a stop to all leather factories and make the world humane,instead of war on the innocents in Europe and elsewhere.Indeed,we would have NIRVANA today in the world,if only they had wisdom of the three wise ,the Magi.

Posted by: Ravi Pandya | January 7, 2008 09:09 AM

Hitler was not vegetarian.

Posted by: Ana | January 7, 2008 12:13 PM

Sapper,

I agree that animals don't require the same rights as humans, but what rights do you feel they should have?

Posted by: Mike Quinoa | January 7, 2008 12:24 PM

emily,

They do speak English in India. Indians and other foreigners have come to accept American ignorance regarding their homeland.

Posted by: K | January 7, 2008 12:56 PM

kyle,

We are not saying animals require the SAME rights as humans. Only equal consideration of their own interests. A dog shouldn't have a right to vote because that right is irrelevant to a dog, rather a dog should have a right to not have unnecessary pain inflicted on him since a dog certainly has an interest not to have pain inflicted on himself. Is it really that hard to just leave animals alone? That's not too much to ask, eh?

Posted by: K | January 7, 2008 01:08 PM

Ravi Pandya: As a fellow-hindu i can just approve your statement and tell you that i'm mourning every day the past glory of Mother Bharata but as we are living actually in kali yuga i'm fearing that things shall even turn worse! when i think that there was a time when Sri Krishna walked on this earth and all the creatures were free and respected and happy - i get tears in my eyes! as a european unfortunately i have to say that it is very bad how many indians adopt the decadent rotten lifestyle of some western 'cultures' which is destroying slowly or even quickly the good, strong and holy indian culture! the best you can do if you're living in india to organize workshops and websites to educate the indian masses and bring them back to reason and to the holy clean lifestyle they had once years ago - so as a european i can just put my hope into people like you.......

Posted by: RAINBOW WARRIOR | January 7, 2008 02:38 PM

i think peta india is great thing but i was wundering if kyle and Natalie are brain dead keep up the good work peta

Posted by: bob | January 7, 2008 04:24 PM

I have to thank peta for showing videos on how animals are raised in cages for their fur. I cant believe that is going on. I personally dont wear leather and fur but i am curious on how peta feels about natives using animals to survive like some people still do today?

Posted by: amber | January 7, 2008 05:32 PM

the animals have all of the rights they need or will ever need right now i know how peta likes to make it seem that every animal in the world that is raised on a farm for human consumption suffers every single day of there lives but that is just not true

Posted by: sapper | January 7, 2008 07:12 PM

I live in New Delhi and I havent seen anything in the news regarding this.!!??Good job guys.

PS-There are more Indians who understand English than the whole population of England

Posted by: XOXO | January 8, 2008 06:40 AM

Sapper: PETA has more than enough video to back their claims of animal suffering. Have you got any video to back your claims? Can you provide us with a video of animals raised on a farm to be killed that are enjoying their lives?? Do you have footage showing their deaths so we can verify they enjoyed themselves right up until they quit breathing?? Would LOVE to see it........

Posted by: Antigone1000 | January 8, 2008 10:49 AM

People need to be expermented on yeeeeehaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!! then they would know how animals feel.

Posted by: Mike Coffey | January 8, 2008 11:06 AM

Sapper,

So you think animals "have all of the rights they need or will ever need right now"?

Untrue. How about some basic rights we humans take for granted:

• The right to live out your natural lifespan.

• The right not to have your body mutilated (castrated, dehorned (yeah I know most of us don't have horns), branded, debeaked, tail-docked, teeth cut, injected with growth hormones, etc).

• The right to freedom of movement (and so on).

You won't find a single animal that is exploited by humans that agrees to it. We can get away with it because they are powerless to stop it—might is right.

(Note I used the word exploit which implies non-consensuality.)

Posted by: Mike Quinoa | January 8, 2008 11:38 AM

Mike the animals have all the rights they will ever need right now and if you want to apply all of those rights to animals then why not the plants that you all eat too are they not living do they not deserve the right not to be cut or uprooted out of the ground just so you can eat do they not have right to live out their natural lifespan either. besides science is making all sorts of discoveries and advancements every day what are you gonna eat when science one day discovers that plants have thoughts and feelings and suffer the same as every other living being on this planet.

Posted by: sapper | January 8, 2008 01:11 PM

K: i just spent a month in india. yes, english is widely spoken/understood there, but it isn't necessarily spoken/understood well - it isn't the first language of most indians, and therefore they aren't likely to understand a display in english as easily as anyone whose first language is english.

XOXO: that's because india's population is over 25x that of england's. all you're really proving is that at least 1/25th of indians have a basic knowledge of english, which isn't really relevant to whether or not they are able to understand a demonstration with an ironic/subtle english tagline.

also: note that in the second picture the signs are missing anyway? i know if i saw that display without an explanation of what it meant in any language + the name of an organization i wasn't familiar with (indian officials obviously have no knowledge of peta or they'd be more capable of understanding this) i wouldn't have been able to understand what that display meant either.

basically quit making the country of india look stupid/ignorant and realize that there are barriers between our culture and theirs that make the display, though simple to us, more difficult to understand for them. all of you are claiming that human rights and animal rights aren't mutually exclusive - which i agree with - so quit denying these people their natural right of your respect.

Posted by: emily | January 8, 2008 01:34 PM

Mike Coffey

YEAH, YOU FIRST, YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAWWWWW!

Posted by: Caboose | January 8, 2008 04:42 PM

plants are not sentient

Posted by: Ana | January 8, 2008 05:21 PM

Sapper, since when do you get to decide just how many rights animals should have?

Non-human animals have been on this planet for hundreds of millions of years without human interference, and it is humans who have really messed things up for all earthlings.

Plants do not have a central nervous system so they cannot "suffer" when they are uprooted or cut.

Look up the definition of "speciesism". You are a speciesist (in case you don't feel like looking it up, I will tell you that it is not a compliment).

Posted by: Michele | January 8, 2008 09:57 PM

Ana,
"Hitler was not a vegetarian" is a big call, on a similar scale to those who say he was. I've seen people claim Einstein as a vegetarian, and he apparently was for a couple of years near his death.

Secretary's view here:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1800287.stm

Even Rynn Berry's book is vague, concentrating on how devout Hitler was to not eating meat, rather than the principles Hitler held. http://www.slate.com/id/2096259/

Anyway I don't think it matters one way or the other. I just find it amusing how vegetarian groups are so eager to claim "good" people as one of their own on scant information, or if they were veg for a few years, yet will vehemently deny "baddies" like Hitler who seems to have adopted a principly(although not strictly) vegetarian diet.

Don't get me started on his views on animal rights though.

If we take the definition of sentient:that feels, then in fact some plants to respond to touch by folding up leaves, and others can follow the sun with their leaves, indicating perception of heat radiation. Plants are "aware" of other plants, around them and will grow tall and spindly to get above them, or crawl along the ground to get light. If you have a look plants in darkened areas grow toward the light, rarely away. Do they feel pain like us -no.

I'll be away for a couple of weeks, sorry in advance for lack of further correspondence. Or apology if required.

cheers

Posted by: rojo | January 9, 2008 10:40 AM

Sapper,

Plants...

1) Have no evolutionary reason to perceive pain since they cannot locomote away from it.
2) Even if they could perceive pain, plants are actually consumed indirectly in far greater numbers by meat-eaters, since the animals they eat generally consume vast amounts of plant food. And meat-eaters eat plants as well as meat . About the only thing in a traditional hamburger that is not plant-based is the meat patty itself.
3) Are not always harmed in the process of harvesting, e.g. many fruits.
4) Often are about to die anyway at the end of a growing season, which is when they are usually harvested (e.g. prior to the onset of winter and a killing frost).

Posted by: Mike Quinoa | January 9, 2008 12:36 PM

Ana are you sure plants are not sentient just because science has not yet discovered they are sentient does not mean they aren't just think about all of the different discoveries scientists have found in the past 10 - 15 years.

Posted by: sapper | January 9, 2008 01:23 PM

The second caption says "after a thorough investigation..." And if you look closely at the first picture you can see one of the officer's shoes, so they saw the signs.

Also, it seems that law enforcement officials would likely fall among those who do speak English, and "murder" should be a recognizable word to them.

Clearly none of us knows every detail of the situation, but I think we can still appreciate the protestors and find some amusement at the complete bewilderment of the officials (who will now HAVE to learn about PETA to avoid looking so stupid in the future).

Posted by: Natalie | January 9, 2008 02:12 PM

THE FREAKIN POSTER SAYS IT ALL! What didn't they understand?

Posted by: Ross | January 9, 2008 04:28 PM

Hi Sapper!

Sorry, I'm not trying to answer for Ana, but I just thought I'd comment.

Our central nervous system is responsible for causing us pain. The nerves all throughout our body sense injury, for example from a burn or if we are cut with a knife.

From the origin of injury, a signal is sent through the central nervous system to our brains, where we are given the SENSATION of pain.

Plants do not have a brain, and they do not have a central nervous system. It is impossible for them to feel pain. This has been proven by science.

Also, pain would be really useless in a plant. The reason any animal feels pain is to avoid severe injury. In other words, if a bear steps on a sharp rock, it can jump back when it feels the pain. That protects the bear from getting a cut where he could bleed to death.

Plants cannot move. So they did not evolve to feel pain because if a plant gets injured, it cannot move so it cannot escape serious injury. So nature had no reason to give it a brain or central nervous system for pain feedback.

While I respect you as a person, Sapper, I wonder if you have ever taken any science classes. A blog is kind of a lousy place to learn about pet care or biological science.

You seem interested enough in it, I don't know if you're in college, or something, but I strongly encourage you to take some science / pet care classes.

I say that ONLY because a doctor of biology or science or a veterinarian would be in a MUCH better position to explain these concepts to you. They are WAY too complex to explain on a blog!

Also, so much Internet information is completely bogus. Speak to someone with a real degree in the subject.

Peace and respect!!

;)

Posted by: Maya, CVT | January 11, 2008 02:01 PM