The Anti-Humans in Our Midst

                                                 The  Anti-Humans  in  Our  Midst
     The sick comics shown above are being distributed by PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of
Animals) to young children in the United States.  The comics go on to tell young children that their mommy
and daddy will probably kill their puppies and kittens next.  Only a sociopath or psychopath would commit
such a horrendous crime that traumatizes young children.  What is happening in the United States and
elsewhere around the world is the rise of a population with a form of self-induced mental illness related to
environmental and animal "rights" issues as well as "global warming/ climate change."  What makes these
people mentally ill is their inability to distinguish between animals and the environment and human beings.
Wesley Smith provides an excellent overview of this mental illness in his recent book A Rat is a Pig is a
Dog is a Boy: The Human Cost of the Animal Rights Movement.  Normal people recognize that rats, pigs,
dogs and human boys are not the same.  Environmentalists and animal "rights" activists do not recognize
any distinction between these groups. 
      The expression "a rat is a pig is a dog is a boy" was coined by Ingrid Newkirk of PETA.  "Humans
have grown like a cancer!" says PETA head, Ingrid Newkirk.  "We're the biggest blight on the face of the
earth!  There is no rational basis for saying that a human being has special rights.  Would I rather the
research lab that tests animals is reduced to a bunch of cinders?" she raves on.  "Yes, I will be the last
person to condemn ALF (the Animal Liberation Front).  Animal liberationists do not separate out the
human animal.  A rat is a pig is a dog is a boy.  They're all mammals."
      Beginning in 2003 PETA initiated a campaign with the slogan The Holocaust on Your Plate.  In that
crazy and misguided effort, PETA equated the killing of animals with the Nazi Holocaust in Germany
when millions of Jews were slaughtered.  Below are some of the images from that campaign.
                     In this display PETA is saying that human children and baby pigs are equal in value.
                        The caption in the display above reveals the anti-human motivations of PETA.
                                  Again we see PETA saying that humans and animals are equal.
      For PETA to denigrate the Jewish Holocaust to the level of their sick love affair with animals is
obscene!  Nothing reveals the mental instability of the individuals involved with PETA and the animal
"rights" movement more than this sickening and ignorant display.
      The billboard above was recently put up in Times Square in New York City.  What the "PETA Kills
Animals" refers to is the PTEA animal shelter in Norfolk, Virginia.  In 2009 PETA killed 2,301 dogs, cats,
puppies and kittens at its own animal shelter.  Only 8 animals were adopted.  That is a kill rate of over 97%.
Since 1998 PETA has killed over 19,000 animals at its shelter.  In addition, PETA employees went to
North Carolina and collected animals from other shelters, promising to have the animals adopted.  Instead
these PETA employees stuffed the animals into plastic garbage bags, most  often while they were still
alive, and disposed of the animals in dumpsters close to the North Carolina animal shelters to discredit the
shelters. has more details about this horrendous
crime against animals by PETA.  The PETA employees were arrested and face animal cruelty charges. 
The PETA animal "shelter" in Norfolk has steadily decreased the number of animals adopted while
increasing their kill rate.  PETA has the philosophy that it is better for animals to be dead than be kept
as human pets, and this sick notion probably accounts for the increasingly high kill rate.
      In May of 1981 Alex Pacheco, a student in political science at George Washington University and co-
founded of PETA, volunteered to work at the laboratory of Dr. Edward Taub at The Institute of Behavioral
Research at Silver Spring, Maryland.  Dr. Taub had been using moneys to determine if stroke patients could
relearn how to use their limbs after suffering a stroke.  The intent of Alex Pacheco was to spy on this work
and possibly shut down the research because of Dr. Taub's use of monkeys.  When Dr. Taub went on
vacation, Pacheco told the graduate students who fed the monkeys and cleaned their cages to stop coming
to work.  When the conditions at the laboratory were in sufficiently bad, Pacheco reported the "deplorable
conditions" at the laboratory to the Humane Society, the NIH, and other agencies.  When Dr. Taub returned
from vacation he was charged with 119 criminal charges, all related to the actions of Alex Pacheco.  In the
first trial 113 of the 119 charges were dismissed.  At a second trial 5 more charges were dismissed, and after
two years the final charge was dismissed, but the work of Dr. Taub had been destroyed and his reputation
ruined.  What is significant about this act of domestic terrorism by PETA is that it was Alex Pacheco who
was guilty of animal cruelty!
      One should not confuse animal "rights" activists with those who advocate animal welfare and the
humane treatment of animals.  Animal "rights" activists are more anti-human than they are pro-animal.
Environmentalists are also anti-human and have proposed various means to reduce the population of the
Earth to "save" the Earth.  The "global warming/climate change" hysterics are in the same camp.  All three
groups are willing to do real harm to individual human beings and human beings in general to advance their
radical agendas.
      Peter Singer, an Australian philosopher - of sorts, set the animal "rights" movement in motion with his
book, Animal Liberation, published in 1975.  In what was known as a "utilitarian" approach of the greatest
good for the greatest number, Singer said that some humans have less value than some animals and that
animals should be included in the "greater number" of his utilitarian approach.  Singer argued that an animal's
ability to feel pain should be the determining factor that animals and humans are equal.  One might be able to
convince some silly schoolgirl with this argument, but normal human beings recognize that this argument is
immoral.  It is the inability of the animal "rights" activist to be aware of their immorality that makes them
mentally ill.  There is no morality among animals; that is the definition of animal-like behavior.  Animals
attack and kill other animals and eat them alive.  I once observed turtles killing and eating ducklings in a
nearby lake.  Some silly old women thought this was "terrible" and said the turtles should be removed from
the lake.  What the old women failed to recognize was that this was normal animal-like behavior.
      In the delusional world of animal "rights" activists I guess we should have charged the turtles with murder
and brought the case to court.  As ridiculous as this sounds, it is exactly what animal "rights" activists have in
mind, but the only beings that will be charged will be human beings.  In another mistake of logic, Peter Singer
also edited a bit of nonsense called "The Great Ape Project."  It was a collection of articles promoting the
notion that chimpanzees, gorillas, and orangutans should have the ability to obtain lawyers as advocates to
bring charges against human beings.  This idea of "animal standing" is already being advanced in law schools
in the United States; providing a disturbing picture of just how deeply the animal "rights" sickness has 
infected the country.
      Again, you will notice that it is not proposed that animals would bring charges against any other animals
other than human beings.  It is not proposed that ducks will charge turtles with murder.  What is obvious in
all this sick nonsense is that the animal "rights" movement is an anti-human movement by mentally disturbed
individuals.  The same can be said for the environmental movement and the "global warming/climate change"
      One thing that distinguishes animal "rights" activists and environmentalists, and now "global warming/
climate change" activists is that they are willing to destroy people's lives in their sick quests.  Humans have
no rights when they run afoul of these demented individuals.  What makes animal "rights" people crazy is
that they would be willing to kill a human being to "save" an animal.  Their intellects are so weak that they
do not realize this is discrimination against humans; the same type of discrimination they claim humans are
guilty of against animals.
      In his book A Rat is a Pig is a Dog is a Boy, Wesley Smith describes the animal "rights" movement as
a quasi-religion.  It is a religion in which one is reminded of Islamic extremist terrorists.  In one case these
animal "rights" terrorists videotaped the children of animal researchers at their schools and at play and sent
copies to the parents with a note saying, "We know where your children play."  In another case the home
of an animal researcher was set on fire and his children had to escape from a second floor window by
climbing down a rope to avoid being burned alive.  The animal "rights" movement has shown itself to be
a criminal activity without any merit. 
      On April 20, 2010 the Supreme Court of the United States struck down as unconstitutional a law
prohibiting the sale of videos showing animal cruelty by an 8 to 1 vote.  The now-defunct law defined an
act of animal cruelty as one in which "a living animal is intentionally maimed, mutilated, tortured or killed." 
As written, the law would have made criminal any depictions of hunting and fishing activities, and this was
probably the real intent of the law.  The case on appeal was one involving videos showing pit bulls fighting. 
In my opinion, pit bulls should be made extinct because they kill so many humans, especially small children.
The law was also intended to prohibit so-called "crush" videos showing extreme cruelty to animals.  A
narrower law that would only apply to extreme animal cruelty and not to hunting and fishing activities
would probably pass constitutional muster.
      Just what constitutes "animal cruelty" in the eyes of people psychologically conditioned to worship
animals over human beings was best illustrated in the movie Patton.  In this movie, where hundreds of
human beings were maimed, blown up and slaughtered, one scene that was cut from the version broadcast
on television was the shooting of two donkeys that had delayed a column of Allied troops and caused the
column to be strafed by German aircraft.  The donkeys were killed to clear a bridge and allow the column
to proceed.  This is a prime example of how sick American society has become under the influence of the
animal "rights" movement.  Showing the slaughter of human beings is fine, just don't show any animals
being killed.  This is insanity!
      Just how far the insanity of animal "rights" activists has crept into the general population can be illustrated
by a recent case where a woman's cat was accidentally killed by an automobile.  The woman placed a sign in
her yard with the threat, "If you run over my cats, I will run over your kids!"  When a news reporter asked
the woman about the sign, the woman said she considered her cats to be her children.
     In 2008 a remake was make of the 1951 science fiction movie The Day the Earth Stood Still.  In the
original version human beings were evil, in the eyes of the alien being Klaatu, because they were so war-like.
The 2008 version is the ideal fantasy of environmentalists and animal "rights" activists.  Klaatu decides that
human beings are evil this time because they are "spoiling" the environment.  Klaatu's plan is to temporarily
place samples of all the animals on the Earth in a spaceship while he exterminates the human population. 
This is but another example of the new, sick morality that has been put in place by environmentalists and
animal "rights" activists - animals are wonderful and humans are evil.
      In a final scene an EMP (electro-magnetic pulse) is used to destroy all the Earth's technology.  Along
with humans, technology is also a target of the animal "rights" nut cases.  In his book Making a Killing:
The Political Economics of Animal Rights, supporting animal "rights" Robert Torres admits that he draws
on Marxism, social anarchist theory and an abolitionist approach to animal "rights."  His book was published
by AK Press in Oakland, California.  AK press is a self-described anarchist publishing collective.  The
"collective" was an invention of the former Marxist Soviet Union and a mechanism used by hippies to avoid
technology and the free enterprise system.  The environmental and animal "rights" movements are the new
route to Marxism and anarchism.
      PETA is a domestic terrorist organization that advocates violence against institutions and individuals with
whom they disagree.  They are crazies who are recruiting innocent children to commit criminal acts.  They
stand outside schools and distribute things like the sick comics shown above to children as young as six years
old.  PETA brags that they have "contacted" 1.2 million children in this manner.  Everyone involved with
PETA should be arrested, prosecuted, convicted and imprisoned.
  1. Smith, Wesley J.,  A Rat is a Pig is a Dog is a Boy: The Human Cost of the Animal Rights
      Movement, New York, Encounter Books, 2010.
  2. Conn, Michael P. and James V. Parker, The Animal Research War, New York, Macmillan, 2008.
  3. Torres, Robert, Making a Killing: The Political Economics of Animal Rights, Oakland, CA, AK
      Press, 2007.
  4. Driessen, Paul, Eco-Imperialism: Green Power, Black Death, Bellevue, Washington, Merill Press, 2007.
  5. Milloy, Steven, Green Hell: How Environmentalists Plan to Ruin Your Life and What You Can Do to
      Stop Them, Washington, D.C., Regnery Publishing, 2009.
  6. Singer, Peter, Animal Liberation, London, Pimlico, 1975.
  7. Singer, Peter and Paola Cavaieri, The Great Ape Project: Equality Beyond Humanity, New York, St.
      Martin's Press, 1994.
                                                       Copyright © 2010 by Paul Roebling