Animal Rights Extremism (page 117)

In response to complaints about Oklahoma City not spending enough money on animal welfare, The Daily Oklahoman blasts the anti-choice animal rights activists from the People for the Ethical Treatment…

The Boulder City Council is considering replacing all references to "animal owner" in municipal codes with the term "animal guardian." The effort to change the code comes as part a national campaign from the animal rights group In Defense of Animals. As we continue to warn, the estate of your favorite cut of beef may someday see you in court (with an appointed lawyer), if your former "pet" dog doesn't sue you first. ("Pet 'owners' may become 'guardians,'" Scripps-Howard, 6/5/00.)

In reaction to an Environmental Protection Agency draft report released recently, the Center for Health, Environment and Justice and a pack of other nannies continue to allege in a full-page…

Police in Quebec are trying to determine who placed arsenic in the coffee machine outside Laval University's animal and food science department. Dr. Janice Bailey said she and her colleagues are afraid that they've been targeted by radical animal rights activists. "People think that we're abusing the animals or that we're creating Frankenstein-type food products," she said. If true, these are the same activists who want to spike your food choices. ("Arsenic-laced coffee sickens Quebec students," The Ottawa Citizen, 6/2/00.) June 1st

A member of the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) assaulted USDA Secretary Dan Glickman with a tofu cream pie as he began to address the National Nutrition Summit yesterday. PETA was there to protest the inclusion of meat in the dietary guidelines.

The radical animal rights group, Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM), continues to decry the government's new dietary guidelines because of supposed catering "to the meat and dairy lobbies." What PCRM doesn't tell you about its new "alternative" dietary guidelines is that they were created not by a group of "unbiased" dieticians, but by the anti-choice group's board members.

The Los Angeles Times reports on disturbing developments in "animal law." The Times says the success of animal rights lawyers "is beginning to worry those who fear that it could eventually result in higher legal status for all animals, including those used for research and food production." As we've warned before, the estate of your favorite cut of beef may someday see you in court, if your former "pet" dog doesn't sue you first.

Animal Liberation Front (ALF) terrorists blew up one refrigerated meat-carrying truck and planted bombs on nine others this weekend at the Mutchmeats Limited plant in Oxfordshire, England. Luckily, no one was injured and the remaining bombs were defused before they could cause further property damage. An ALF spokesman said the meat industry would continue to be a target as long as it "continues to practice cruelty" towards animals.

A Sunday op-ed in the Washington Post is the latest in a choreographed assault on meat. The factually obscured case of a young Nebraskan's bout with salmonella so frightened the writer that she publicly voiced fear about feeding her children meat, and in doing so may have unnecessarily frightened many other parents. For an interesting discussion of the intense scientific controversy behind these headlines, read Steve Milloy's piece at junkscience.com.

Partisans at the Sierra Club and Consumers Union are planning to insert anti-food junk science into the 2000 presidential campaign. They're taking aim at Governor George W. Bush, alleging that Texan cattle and hog farms produce too much manure. The state's conservation regulators disagree. Expect to see more Sierra Club BS in the months ahead. ("For Bush, the Chips Are Down," Washington Post)