#PETA is by definition a terror group

[just-prime]

All of this. And it certainly doesn't help that PETA intentionally spreads misinformation about this shit.

The example I always go to is the wool and sheep industry.

As taken from the PETA website,

"but without human interference, sheep grow just enough wool to protect themselves from temperature extremes."

And this is just categorically untrue. Do you know what happens if you don't shear a sheep? They turn into a giant matted wooly pom pom and die from overheating. And yet, PETA routinely stages targeted harassment campaigns of death and doxxing threats towards prominent sheep shearers, which is just fucking insane.

anti-egg vegans are always a hoot. like, she’s not using it. it’s not fertilized. it’s going to rot and attract predators. you want me to just throw it in the trash??

[dogwittaablog]

me, an animal lover seeing those dead ducks: it’s not a sport it’s cruelty. how any one could have fun doing this is beyond me.

also me, a uni student, seeing the pile of canadian geese: the enemy of my enemy is my friend. thank u for ur service nolan

***for those unaware, no canadian geese are not cute nor should they be protected. they are an elite group of mercenaries highly trained in close combat whose only. objective is to terrorize you across campus. no where is safe. they know your scent. they are coming. they cannot be trusted or reasoned with and therefore must be neutralized.**

YOU HAD ME IN THE FIRST LINE NGL, I thought I was going to be given a full on Peta rant.

Also it's funny you say this because almost everyone I know has personally been attacked and chased by a geese... UNPROVOKED 😭 those things do not fuck around. They're the definition of NO MERCY.

[austinhuang0131]

My takeaway in the Deciem drama

So the Deciem thing. Another corporate drama right after Elon Musk messing up himself. Gotta get some popcorn to watch.

Since there's always people being out of the loop, time for a

Summary

Many news outlets carry this. I recommend the Toronto Star/Canadian Press and CBC/Canadian Press coverage.

And here's a quick shortcut to the Instagram post in question. With that said, we should first analyse

The Damage

You've probably also heard of how Elon Musk lit fire on himself over some tweets mocking the SEC. But this one is much more different.

Consumers are literally panicking to stock up on The Ordinary from all resellers. (Tesla soon-to-be owners at least weren't that panicked.)

The employees are confused over this random decision with the fear of being fired for no real reason. (That's even worse than Elon Musk erasing his stock value.)

Many news outlets carried this to the extent that it even went on my Google News.

I'd classify this as an act of domestic terrorism already.

The U.S. Code of Federal Regulations defines terrorism as "the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives" (28 C.F.R. Section 0.85).

Brandon Truaxe (CEO of Deciem, in case you forget. "BT" in later mentions) used shutting down a company without notice against a bunch of well-known celebs and companies, Trump included, in furtherance of the objective of "ALL OF THEM ARE ILLEGAL!!!!!!". No joke, this really fits. He should've been put on a list already.

Background

BT left 2 cosmetic companies before because they represent the dark, corrupt & money-hungry cosmetic industry he hates. This could be a reason he finds to defend himself (Unconscious ego for defensive purposes), or this could be a real reason, who knows.

What we can say for sure is his other weird Instagram posts. Personal use of corporate account (Terrible PR in general), unnecessary use of graphic images for a cause (Think about anti-abortion groups in Toronto and PeTA), firing people over social media (Trump), panicking + conspiracy over "lost luggage"... Nothing good are compared with these traits.

Possibilities

In a general order.

1. Mental issues

Everyone eats this explanation. Now, since BT has mental issues, we should wish him well then? "My prayers and condolences to the families of the victims of the terrible incident"?

If he does... To cure a disease, first you need to have the desire to cure. BT doesn't. He frequently lashes at people who claims he has mental issues because he was taken to a private hospital in London that said he doesn't have any problem? Well, if you don't have the desire to cure, certainly you won't open up your problems to others either. He definitely has conscience left, and if he doesn't act when he looked at his company, then he is unsalvageable. We can't force him to cure. Just let him rot. Remember, he got fired from 2 companies already, and also we have natural selection in place.

If he doesn't...

2. Drug use

That's up to the legal prosecutors. Again, stopping drug use also requires determination.

3. Hunger Marketing at its worst. Seriously.

Maybe he wants to break ties with all the resellers? Maybe he wants consumers to buy his products like crazy?

Ending

You might want to check your Deciem stuff right now. BT's abnormalities might have reflected on the products already (BT has been like that since January). If something shows up, go to consumer protection immediately!

If the true motive landed on my Third guess, then you should consider boycotting Deciem.

[academic-witch]

The Virginia Department of Agriculture & Consumer Services (VDACS) has finally received and posted PETA’s killing rate for 2016. As tragic as they are, they are typical. PETA rounded up and took in 1,069 cats, of which 855 left the building in garbage bags (854 were poisoned by PETA, 1 died), a death rate of 80%.

Since PETA refuses to work with No Kill shelters, another 184 were sent to shelters that kill healthy and/or treatable animals. If they were killed or they displaced other cats who were killed, that puts the overall death rate as high as 99% for cats. Five were reclaimed and only 27 (less than 3% of the cats) were adopted out.

PETA took in 891 dogs. They put 557 to death, a 63% rate of killing. They sent another 294 to shelters that kill. Like the cats, if they were killed or displaced others who were killed, that would put the overall death rate for dogs at 96%. Five were reclaimed and only 30 found homes.

By comparison, Virginia’s combined private animal shelters — which PETA is registered with VDACS as — only kill 7% of dogs and 17% of cats on average. Statewide, including municipal pounds, 10% of dogs and 31% of cats are killed. PETA’s rate of killing is 530% higher for dogs and 158% higher for cats that the average of all pounds and shelters. Compare the open admission shelter in Lynchburg, VA, which took in more dogs and cats that PETA on a fraction of its budget and had a live release rate of 97% for dogs and 86% of cats. Other open admission shelters had even higher rates: placing 98%-99% of all animals.

And that’s not all PETA did in 2016 to harm animals. PETA also worked to encourage others to kill animals, too. Not only do they fight legislation to save more of them, not only do they believe all pit bulls should be killed in all shelters, not only do they round up to kill community cats, but they encourage others to do the same. Last summer in Seaside Heights, NJ, they asked the Mayor to evict cats living on the beach, arguing that they “would be better off with a lethal injection.” They also told Camden County officials last month that cats smell, they are a nuisance, make too much noise, are a public health and rabies threat, transmit disease and parasites, including “roundworms, hookworms, and even plague,” and “terrorize and kill” 15 billion other animals a year, urging them to round up and kill cats, too.

Historically, PETA leadership has been unapologetic about the killing they have done. PETA founder Ingrid Newkirk once stated in an interview with The Virginian-Pilot that: “We are not in the home finding business, although it is certainly true that we do find homes from time to time for the kind of animals people are looking for. Our service is to provide a peaceful and painless death to animals no one wants.” This, of course, begs the question: how can people want animals if PETA fails to make them available for adoption, does not advertise them, choosing instead to kill them right away? Moreover, animals they have poisoned in the past, like Maya, the little dog they stole and killed, already had homes.

To defray mounting criticism, PETA has more recently claimed that all of the animals they kill are irremediably suffering, stating that adoptable animals don’t come to PETA, but instead are referred to local adoption groups and animal shelters. Of course, Maya’s case betrays that. The other killings—of puppies and kittens—betray that. And Newkirk herself, in a moment of candor, betrayed it. During a television interview, when asked if PETA killed healthy animals, she answered that they “absolutely” did.

Moreover, PETA has been killing about 2,000 animals a year for decades. In the past, before its rates of killing became the subject of sustained public scrutiny and dozens of communities across the country achieved live release rates between 98% and 99% of shelter animals—proving that “euthanasia” can be reserved for its dictionary definition (applying only to incurably ill and injured animals)—PETA admitted it killed healthy and treatable animals calling it “the kindest, most realistic thing to do.” In other words, until the No Kill movement came into its own and proved that shelter killing can be eliminated, PETA attempted to defray criticism for its killing by cloaking it in the euphemisms and rationalizations used to justify shelter killing, even though, in reality, they do not act in a sheltering capacity. They are under no governmental mandate to provide sheltering services for the community where they are headquartered.

While PETA leadership claims PETA provides little more than end of life low-cost “euthanasia” services, staff have also refuted this claim. Speaking confidentially for fear of retribution, one of them confided that while they “have seen people bring in their very sick or very old animals to be euthanized because they can’t afford to go to a vet hospital… a majority of the ones that I saw were healthy animals.” In fact, she described that the end of life killing of very sick animals was “rare” in contrast to PETA’s claim that it is the only—or depending on who at PETA is being asked, the majority of the—killing that they do.

[marymosley]

Terror Nation: How Millions Are Being Declared Terrorists For Their Political Views

Below is my column in The Hill on a growing tendency to label opposing views as terrorism in our age of rage. Democratic activists have labeled ICE as a “terrorist organization” while Republicans use that term for Antifa. It is also a way to dismiss opposing views as extremism with no need to listen, let alone respond. With the escalation of such rhetoric, millions of Americans are being portrayed as terrorists – a trend that robs the term of any real meaning. Yet, numerous officials, including the Board of Supervisors, in San Francisco supported the ridiculous resolution declaring the NRA to be a “domestic terrorist organization” and, by extension, its five million members domestic terrorists. It is not enough to disagree over the meaning of an individual right, the other side must now be little better than ISIS for disagreeing with you.

Here is the column:

It is not everyday that a public official uncovers more than five million terrorists living in the United States, including many working in some of the highest offices of the land. Yet, San Francisco District Two Supervisor Catherine Stefani managed to achieve precisely that this week, when the city board of supervisors passed her resolution declaring the National Rifle Association to be a domestic terrorist organization.

For Stefani and other board members, it is not enough to disagree with gun rights advocates. They must be declared terrorists. Otherwise, this would be a mere political disagreement. The San Francisco resolution encourages cities, states, and the federal government to follow suit. It states that NRA terrorism includes spreading “propaganda” and arming “those individuals who would and have committed acts of terrorism.”

The resolution follows a declaration from New York Attorney General Letitia James in launching an investigation of the NRA which she previously declared to be not a “charitable organization” but a “terrorist organization.” Of course, the NRA promotes the Second Amendment, which the Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed as the basis of an individual constitutional right to bear arms. Thus, San Francisco is declaring that advocacy of a constitutional right is akin to being an arm of the Islamic State.

For her part, Stefani expressed nothing but glee in declaring those on the other side of the gun debate to be terrorists. “The NRA has it coming to them. I will do everything I possibly can to call them out on what they are, which is a domestic terrorist organization,” she said. For the other supervisors, voting against the declaration might have risked being accused of giving material support to a terrorist organization.

The resolution is the very definition of demagoguery. It also is a sign of our time as the perfect resolution for the age of rage. Many people of good faith have criticized the NRA for years, while the organization has opposed many reasonable limits on gun ownership and has painted anyone on the other side as enemies of freedom and liberty.

Yet, it is not uncommon for organizations advocating for individual rights to be “extreme” in their support for that right. NARAL is a pro-choice organization opposing virtually any limit on the right of women to secure abortions, including supporting “partial birth abortion” which most Americans oppose. Environmental groups like Greenpeace oppose most measures that undermine the environment. PETA opposes almost any use of animals, even calling for a robotic “Punxsutawney Phil” groundhog.

Most advocacy groups follow the view of Barry Goldwater that “extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice.” Such advocacy is no act of terrorism. In politics these days, however, it is not enough to disagree. You must condemn the very act of speaking or advocating as a virtual crime. That way, you relieve yourself of any responsibility to listen or respond to an opposing view. Many academics and advocates now believe they can stop people from speaking by declaring them to be racists or terrorists.

At the University of California at Santa Barbara, feminist studies associate professor Mireille Miller Young criminally assaulted pro-life advocates on campus, and later pleaded guilty to the crime. She was defended by faculty and students, including many who said she was “triggered” by a pro-life display and that pro-life advocates were “terrorists” who did not deserve free speech. The university refused to suspend or fire her, who has since been celebrated as a leader in feminist activism.

It is now routine for many faculty and students on college campuses across the country to prevent others from speaking by claiming they are acting to stop violent or racist speech. Such declarations are incredibly liberating in that you are no longer confined by notions of free speech.

Indeed, Antifa is dedicated to defeating free speech. Dartmouth University professor Mark Bray, author of a handbook on Antifa, explained, “At the heart of the anti-fascist outlook is a rejection of the classical liberal phrase” that “says I disapprove of what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” He defined anti-fascists as “illiberals” who reject the notion that far right views deserve to “coexist” with opposing views. The goal of Antifa is not to coexist but “to end their politics.”

As someone who has spent a lifetime advocating for free speech, I have long denounced Antifa as a despicable organization. But I was also one of the first to object to President Trump supporting the declaration of Antifa a domestic terrorist organization. That is the problem with free speech. You often have to fight for those who least deserve it, like an organization dedicated to denying it to others. There is no question here that Antifa supporters regularly engage in violent acts, but that does not mean it is a terrorist organization, any more than environmental groups are terrorist organizations when their members engage in such raging acts.

Likewise, many people applauded Democratic candidate and South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg after he called for all groups deemed “white nationalist” to be declared domestic terrorists. Columnist Derek Beres explained that “such a label also denies another related idea, manifest destiny, which, like American exceptionalism, states that America has a mandate to change the world. By calling Americans terrorists, we can identify the actual root of racial and nationalist tension on our soil.”

So it is that easy. You simply declare whole groups to be terrorists, and you effectively criminalize their “related ideas.” The counterparts to Stefani in the pro-life community could declare pro-choice organizations to be terrorist organizations that kill the unborn, while Texas could declare vegan advocates to be terrorists for spreading “propaganda” against meat. After all, San Francisco declared five million Americans to be terrorists, so what about the other 322 million citizens in this nation?

The question is what terrorism ultimately means if everyone is declared a terrorist. That answer can be found in a scene from the George Orwell novel “1984,” when O’Brien is torturing the hero Winston in the Ministry of Love. O’Brien explains to Winston, “The object of terrorism is terrorism. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?”

Yes, I am beginning to understand. This is all about the object of power.

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. You can follow him on Twitter @JonathanTurley.

Terror Nation: How Millions Are Being Declared Terrorists For Their Political Views published first on https://immigrationlawyerto.tumblr.com/