Left wing dingbat.

Thank you for continuing to publish incidents of animal rights extremists. Those of us who have been watching these groups know how dangerous they are. They are described with soft, safe language (bunny huggers, animal lovers) but they are terrorists.

Mark,

I would expect no greater eloquence from a rightwing nutjob such as yourself.

She’s rather overboard. At the same time, I acknowledge I place a good animal before a bad human being, and would save any of my beasts before I’d lift a finger for Dick Cheny, Milton Friedman, Ayn Rand, Anders Breivik, Ken Lay…

Regardless of whether or not you approve of the activities of extreme animal rights activists, in what meaningful sense are they ‘hate groups’?

I am an animal advocate. I am not an extremist or terrorist. I strongly disagree with anyone who would promote and/or resort to violence as a way to further their causes. I know that “animal rights” is a very emotional issue. Name-calling may be an easy way to vent but it sheds more heat than light.

In response to Donna Watkins, acts of intimidation and violence are antithetical to animal rights philosophy. Camille Marino dose not represent animal rights advocacy, but extreme cruelty cannot be ignored. BRAVO to1000 animal rights advocates who rescued beagle puppies in northern Italy, a heroic act that would be falsely labeled as terrorism in U.S.

^[4]

To those of you hiding under the auspices of the system who know that vivisection is wrong and support the systematic unnecessary violation and torture of animals, it’s important that you understand that you are the terrorists, not the animal acitvists doing a job that society should consider heroic. In fact, the fear of losing your cushy jobs which mislabel vivisectors as scientists, is what keeps you in deep denial of what you know is a dark and ugly part of human history. Anyone calling activists nuts and so on, are already showing a lack of intelligence and comprehension of the enormity about this problematic money making ‘enterprise’. You must surely be aware that animal experimentation is big business and big bucks. Who’s the terrorist? Funny how Jesus was labeled a terrorist in his day for preaching the identical thing that animal rights activistists are saying. By the way, it’s interesting to note that the only reason vivisectors are worried is not because they are torturing animals to death but because where they live has been discovered. Unless they have guilty conscience and have something to hide, this shouldn’t be any concern. Shame on their evil, Govt sanctioned crimes against the animal kindgom.

The true terrorists are the sadistic monsters engaging in fraudulent pseudo-science, who devastate the lives of innocent beings. In Donal O’Leary’s case at Wayne State University, he slices open dogs taken from local shelters and implants various monitoring devices. With the wounds still seeping blood and pus, he forces them to run on treadmills and induces heart attacks. Previously happy, healthy and loving dogs become sullen and fearful, constantly in pain and under stress, until they are murdered.

Like almost all research on animals, nothing of any value is learned that saves human lives. Even if it was useful, inflicting this misery on a feeling, thinking, innocent, sentient being would be morally indefensible. The fact that it yields mostly wrong information which often harms those it is meant to help, makes this even more horrific.

Contrast that with animal rights activists, even the most militant of whom have never physically harmed any living being. It is obvious who the real terrorists are.

It should also be obvious, in light of the oppressive AETA statute passed in an empty congress through procedural manipulation, that the animal agriculture industry in general and the vivisection complex in particular, have used their considerable resources to buy laws which directly challenge our basic freedoms, in order to protect their flow of blood money. If they are successful in silencing animal activists, anyone of you could be next.

I can’t wait for everyone to start chiming in about how we lack empathy for disapproving of Camille Marino. And that cockroaches are sentient beings.

How the Hell do they get them from shelters?… That takes looking at right there.

REYNARDDINE…THE SHELTERS SELL THE DOGS TO CLASS B DEALERS AND RESEARCH FACILITIES..DOGS THAT OTHERWISE WOULD END UP REHOMED..DONNA WATKINS..YES I HUG BUNNIES..YES I AM AN ANIMAL LOVER…YES I AM AN ANIMAL ADVOCATE..BUT I AM NOT A…TERRORIST…NEVER BEEN ONE..NEVER WILL BE ONE….LIBEL AND SLANDER SPRING TO MIND, YES I FIGHT FOR THE RIGHTS OF THE ANIMALS….BEING TORTURED, MUTILATED, ABUSED, PUNCHED IN THE FACE AND SLAPPED BECAUSE THEY ARE WHIMPERING WITH FEAR AND PAIN, IF YOU HAVE NEVER WATCHED A VIDEO OF WHAT THE ANIMALS GO THROUGH IN THESE VIVISECTION AND EXPERIMENT LABS ..WATCH SOME…I DARE YOU..IF YOU HAVE NEVER WATCHED ONE DONT COMMENT ON SOMETHING YOU HAVE NEVER SEEN…IF YOU HAVE THE GUTS TO WATCH SOME, THEN YOU WILL SEE WHY THIS HAS TO BE STOPPED…NO ANIMAL DESERVES TO GO THROUGH THIS..DAY AFTER DAY, AFTER DAY…..I SUPPORT CAMILLE MARINO 100%…DONT FORGET..DONT CALL ME A.. TERRORIST.. OK…I ADVOCATE TO….SAVE…..THE LIVES OF THOUSANDS OF SHELTER ANIMALS…..EVERY DAY….

When our military forcefully goes into other countries to right what are considered wrongs they are not considered terrorists. Nor should good people who are trying to stop animal abuse be considered terrorists. People who condone and participate in the support of vivisection and other animal torture in the name of science are committing no less greater crimes than Adolph Hitler. If there were more appropriate laws in place to protect inhumane and torturous acts against both human animals and nonhuman animals there would not be such a need for extreme actions from ethical people who care. Unfortunately we live in an era run by corporate and individual greed. Human and animal rights are both very emotional issues and for ethical, caring people it easy to allow yourself to be consumed and haunted by the fact that governments allow these acts to go on unpunished. To these people they would rather end up in jail and die fighting for what they believe in rather than stick their heads in the sand. No less heroic than our soldiers fighting for our country and what they believe in. It is criminal that our government is allowing laws to protect the people who are committing and practicing daily inhumane torture. I only sleep at night after praying that we all get what we deserve and reap what we sow by the All Mighty in the end ; )

An Open Letter to the Southern Poverty Law Center

^[5]

Hello, I am an advocate of under-represented classes being oppressed by those with financial power. SPLC seemed to be on the right side in racial struggles. However, you seem to have derailed in the case of vivisection protester, Camille Marino.

^[6]

Instead of taking the side of the animals, the real victims in this case, SPLC seems fixated on “hate speech” spewed by Miss Marino. (Her actual “crime” was disobeying a court order not to post the names and home addresses of vivisectors — information that is readily available from scientific journals in college libraries, and from public records at a local County Clerk’s office. There has been no violence against vivisectors, and people are free to hate anyone for whatever reason they please — and in this case there is good reason.) Hate speech is just that, speech, however the torture of critters continues as you make the real perpetrators of violence sound like heroes — saving the lives of millions through science.

The cruel twist in this lies in the fact that we allocate so much money to the forefront of medical science that we’ve outrun ourselves. In an effort to grab funding, and crank out journal articles quickly, the quality of medical science runs the gamut from cutting edge to junk science. Finally, we neglect the major bottleneck in medicine today, i.e. the lack of availability of extant treatment for the bulk of the population. Simple cures are financially out of reach for the poor.

Remember what the P stands for in your acronym. I hope SPLC reconsiders their stance on animal testing.

James Burnette
Buffalo, New York
(USA — I guess we’re part of the USA)

Research involving animals is highly regulated, and great care is taken to ensure that animals are treated humanely. This is required under the law, but it’s also essential to producing meaningful research results.

I wish people should step back and take a deep breath before believing incendiary characterizations of research such as those Marino has made. She demonizes researchers and characterizes research as torture because she has made up her mind.

Ellie said,

“…acts of intimidation and violence are antithetical to animal rights philosophy.”

That’s incorrect. Dr. Steve Best and others promote the concept of extensional self-defense and argue that violence within the animal rights movement is justified. Jerry Vlasak provides another good example of such lunacy. These individuals are undeniably part of the animal rights movement.

Ron Roberts,

“Like almost all research on animals, nothing of any value is learned that saves human lives. “

Of course this is factually wrong — a common animal rights lie.

Vaccines for polio, rubella, varicella, diphtheria, and so on have saved billions of human lives. Visit the CDC website for numbers. Numerous new therapies and medical imaging technologies have been developed with the responsible use of animals in research. Recent polls form Nature and the Pew Research Center show a 92% agreement among scientists that animal research continue to be essential in advancing medical knowledge and medicine. The scientific consensus on this issue is strong.

“Even if it was useful, inflicting this misery on a feeling, thinking, innocent, sentient being would be morally indefensible.”

Innocence or guilt are concepts that can only be applied to those capable of moral decision making. Non-human animals cannot do this. If a dog bites your child you cannot bring a moral claim against him. The dog would neither be guilty nor innocent of his behavior.

No doubt animals can suffer and they surely deserve our moral consideration. Animal welfare laws and guidelines are based on such recognition. Society and scientists recognize there is a moral dilemma in our use of animals to advance medical knowledge and science. Animal rights extremists prefer their black and white moral universe, where a mouse should have the same basic rights as that of a human or have none at all. They are wrong.

In any case, all this is besides the point.

The basic point here is that a group of animal rights extremists are obviously intent on using violent methods to achieve their political goals.

Most social activists agree that if you do not like a law the right thing to do is change it. And yes, in the process acts of civil disobedience may be necessary.

But this group thinks rejects activism for terrorism. Frustrated with their inability to articulate rational arguments to convince the public of their views they opt for a shortcut. They affirm that if you do not like a law you should simply break it; if you have a moral dispute with someone you are entitled to use violence.

Most researchers who use animal subjects have tremendous respect for them and do everything in their power to avoid causing needless pain. I understand that there are folks who believe that any pain inflicted on any animal is wrong, even animals that would not exist if they had not been bred for slaughter or research use, and I respect their opinions. Folks like Marino, who seem to thoroughly enjoy inflicting suffering on those who don’t share their beliefs are hypocritical monsters.

FACT: CAMILLE MARINO IS CORRECT AND THE CRIMINALS WILL BE SHOWN FOR WHO AND WHAT THEY ARE!

No ‘major breakthroughs’ are imminent and no future treatment/drugs or vaccines are reliant upon continued animal testing.

Biomedical research and Animal Experimentation is fraudulent, misleading and costly in terms of finance and human lives.

Useless research, facilitated by government grants, public ignorance and apathy continues apace. Government is not a neutral force. The health of people, the humane treatment of animals is secondary to economic interests.

The Pharmaceutical Industry and plying of drugs for profit is more important than people’s health.

This is a fact: Tests on animals are not predictive for treatment in humans. Not only is this experimentation worthless, it uses resources which could and should be more effectively be diverted elsewhere.

Animals and humans do not contract the same diseases. Hence, animal testing & research focusses on artificially induced symptoms and disease. Drugs which may prove effective in treating these artificially induced symptoms are not necessarily of benefit to people.

Thalidomide is a classic example of animal testing proven wrong. This drug was tested safely on thousands of animals before coming onto the German market in the 1950′s. Yet the tragic, horrific consequences of that drug are apparent even today.

Penicillin kills cats and guinea pigs but has saved countless human lives. How much sooner could it have been made available if not for adverse results when tested on animals.

Arsenic is not poisonous to rats or sheep.

Morphine is a sedative for humans but a stimulant for horses, goats, cats.

Digitalis lowers heart rate in cardiac patients but raises blood pressure in dogs.

Clioquinot was tested safely on animals. It was intended to treat diarrhea in humans – but actually caused diarrhea. Additionally, over 30,000 cases were reported of blindness/paralysis in human patients. Thousands of human deaths occurred.

A Quote, to sum up:

“There are no alternatives to animal experimentation, for one can only talk of alternatives if these replace soemthing of the same worth. And there is nothing quite as USELESS, MISLEADING & HARMFUL as ANIMAL EXPERIMENTATION”.

(Professor Pietro Croce, MD).

Annie,

Animals and humans do not contract the same diseases? How about HIV/AIDS, H1N1, H5N1?

Nice try, though.

Beware the ARAs… They use hate tactics and violence to recruit. Just look at Paul Watson and the Sea Shepherds. They use racial slurs and WWII references to show the violence they think the Japanese are capable of.

Odd that anyone uses terms like ‘left-wing’ or ‘right-wing’ when that’s irrelevant. Fact is she was a bit unhinged and is being called out on her crime (of threatening people, mainly.) Left or right doesn’t matter in this case. Of course, one can say that ‘animal protectors’ like her are often left wing. Certainly, you can say that. But her being left wing isn’t as important as her threatening people, is it? Just as much as one shouldn’t call out everyone right wing just because right wing fanatics form violent racist militias.

so then guys, the researchers who state that animal testing is bringing much advancement to human health, would not worry about an independent enquiry then would they, mmmmmm wonder why they wont have one, say O’leary against another researcher in the open for all to hear, then we can all see for ourselves, the whole world will see,

Our best defense against disease/viruses is a strong immune system which can be obtained by a plant strong diet. Vaccines and other pharmaceuticals often work to lower and compromise our overall immune system especially when given in group injections such as we subject our infants and small children to as well as the elderly with yearly toxic flu shots. Most have toxins in them that can lead to cancer, systemic inflammatory response and allergic reactions, etc. They are not needed for animals or humans. Many animal diseases may be given the same name as human ones but they are very different. You can’t catch feline HIV as a human. The research should not be done through torturous experiments but by research on the link between nutrition, detoxing our environment and exercise to promote perfect health. Then the research animals would be getting delightfully fresh organic meals, clean air and sunshine and taken on regular walks….oh wait, that IS how loving pet owners treat their animals!!! Unfortunately there is no big money in promoting something natural that can’t be patented and most doctors and scientist are completely clueless about nutrition. They focus on spending and making trillions on drugs and surgeries rather than focusing on clean foods to prevent the health crisis in the first place………how did we become such a greedy and ignorant society?

Alice said, “Research involving animals is highly regulated, and great care is taken to ensure that animals are treated humanely. This is required under the law, but it’s also essential to producing meaningful research results.”
————

“Humane” loses it’s meaning within a system of exploiting nonhuman animals. Instead of affirming kindness, it is reduced to meaning less cruel.

Jimmy D said: “Vaccines for polio, rubella, varicella, diphtheria, and so on have saved billions of human lives. Visit the CDC website for numbers. Numerous new therapies and medical imaging technologies have been developed with the responsible use of animals in research.”
———

That animal tests were successful doesn’t mean other methods would have failed, and that further methods can’t be developed.
————————

“Recent polls form Nature and the Pew Research Center show a 92% agreement among scientists that animal research continue to be essential in advancing medical knowledge and medicine. The scientific consensus on this issue is strong.”
———

Of course it is — scientists are comfortable exploiting nonhumans.

———————

Ron Roberts said: “Even if it was useful, inflicting this misery on a feeling, thinking, innocent, sentient being would be morally indefensible.”
———-

I agree completely.
———————–

Johnny D said: “Innocence or guilt are concepts that can only be applied to those capable of moral decision making. Non-human animals cannot do this. If a dog bites your child you cannot bring a moral claim against him. The dog would neither be guilty nor innocent of his behavior. ”
———-

Like us, social nonhumans are capable of empathy — that is the foundation of morality — and they indeed have a sense of what’s right and wrong (aka moral code) within their groups. And even if they had no idea of right and wrong, that wouldn’t justify using them in animal research.
—————————

“No doubt animals can suffer and they surely deserve our moral consideration. Animal welfare laws and guidelines are based on such recognition. Society and scientists recognize there is a moral dilemma in our use of animals to advance medical knowledge and science. Animal rights extremists prefer their black and white moral universe, where a mouse should have the same basic rights as that of a human or have none at all. They are wrong.”
———–

Not “black and white”, but rather a moral code based on sound principles that aren’t traded for convenience. Animal research is based on a utilitarian ethic that doesn’t even come close to being moral.

The truth is, animal experiments are just bad science based on an emotion, the ‘feeling’ that humans are superior to all other animals. The mere fact that humans do animal experiments proves that’s clearly not true.

I’m an animal activist, but I am 100% AGAINST these groups who advocate “civil disobedience” such as NIO, Steve Best, and Animal Liberation front who are doing more HARM than good. The AETA was passed due to these extreme groups.

The very moment threats are made, it is no longer free speech.

I admit I have just had ham and eggs at the town café, yet the following scenario has crossed my mind:

Conquering alien: Okay, Earthlings, you lost. We’re going to fatten some of you for meat, milk the young women with the biggest tits, roast the excess babies for Thanksgiving, experiment on some of you, neuter some of you and keep you for pets, use the biggest ones for draught, and grind up the old ones for fertilizer.

Human: You can’t do that to us!

Alien: Why not? You do it to *your* animals.

Human: But we’re intelligent!

Alien: Well, you look pretty stupid to us.

Now excuse me. The waitress just brought my check…

Love it, Reynardine.

Queenie was a pit bull/dalmatian mix. Most dogs impounded and killed are pit bulls and their mixes. Breed specific legislation would help enormously to cut down on the pit bull population which would prevent them from getting killed in dog pounds; it would also prevent them from being used for dog fighting and bait training by countless thugs and gangs out there. But the animal activists will scream bloody murder even if you suggest proposing pit bull bans. Animal activists CAUSE more animal suffering. Cat colonies is another BIG mistake – animal activists don’t care to see the reality–about the countless cats out there shot, run over by cars, poisoned, burned alive, by cruel humans. Homeless cats lose because nobody looks after them: It’s far more humane to impound and euthanize them. Even the horse slaughter ban has created horrendous animal cruelty: Horses were transported overseas and often die from cruel horrible conditions, and such countries as Mexico and Canada has no standards regarding slaughter. I wrote an email to President Obama to PLEASE PLEASE rescind the slaughter ban because at least in USA it’s more humane with USDA standards. I don’t know what happened, but the President did, in fact, overturn the horse slaughter ban and I thanked him for that.

Mr. Thomas, I will shortly call you a well-intentioned moron.

Animal rights are not the problem, blowing things up is…

“You are entitled to your own opinions but not your own facts”
Anyone who says that all animal research is a waste of time and money and does nothing to further human medicine is ignorant, period. All significant medical breakthroughs have their genesis in animal research. This is a fact and cannot be debated. Only those wholly uneducated in the area dispute this. You might as well argue against the existence of gravity.
Dave – you ask for an independent inquiry???? That is exactly what a NIH Initial Review Group is. Composed of dozens of scientists from across the nation they review each grant proposal based on the MERITS and SIGNIFICANCE of the work and ultimately on what IMPACT it will have on the field. This researcher has been funded continuously for 20 years (check the NIH Reporter web site).
Marino is a criminal…period. Now she is living with other criminals, exactly where she belongs. To make anything more of her is a waste of time.

Alice- Exactly what planet are you living on?
Does any of the information linked below sound “humane” and/or “regulated?”
Also adding “Fact”- these experiments have been continuing at Wayne State University in Detroit, MI for 22 years with “not a single proven medical advancement” related to them …..
Yes Alice, NOT EVEN ONE ….we are talking pure scientific fraud here and guess who is paying top dollar for it?
YOU, the taxpayer!!!
Please get your facts, before you speak utter nonsense!
Queenie’s vet records: ^[7]

The Activist above has been arrested for mor than terroro threats. She has also ben arrested for illegal narcotics use. Now any animal lover would know that Heroin is in fact tested on animals. So why do people supprt her for. She is a a criminal and is also again wanted for making threats and inciting terror. She is going down

Camille was arrested the second time for peacefully protestic the vicious abuse, at the hands of a vivisector, of Queenie, who was taken from a so shelter.

Such a breach of protection is not possible in India, where it is against the law for shelter or stray animals to be used by vivisectors:

“(Indian) Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act:

• Stray animals may not be used for research. The Rules for Experimental Animals, as formulated by the Committee for the Control and Supervision of Experimental Animals, state that only animals bred for the purpose of research by institutes registered by the Committee may be used for experimentation (although, of course, such animals suffer and feel pain just as much as strays or any other animal). It is illegal for any medical, educational or commercial research institute to pick up stray animals from the street or from the municipal pound for this purpose.”

Such legislation is only possible in India, where compassionate religious values influence animal protective legislation.

In the USA, a judeo.christian nation, dominion allows for the killing and exploitation of animals for human benefit.

In such an environment, camille had no other choice that to peacefully protest the cruelty which resulted in a horrific death for Queenie.

One has to wonder why neo Nazi groups are allowed to hold rallies, despite violent rhetoric, while Camille, who was peacefully protesting the terrible abuse of Queenie and all other animals held as prisoners of an acncient war waged by the judeo.christian concept of dominion, was arrested.

It is possible that her presence and protest threatened the influx of grant money for those who benefit from animal abuse.

Animal abuse, even when it is labeled necessary for the advancement of medicine is still animal abuse…

While the benefits of vivisection are questionable, the harm it does to the human spirit are not. Mahatma Gandhi understood the true impact of vivisection on society:

“I abhor vivisection with my whole soul. All the scientific discoveries stained with innocent blood I count as of no consequence.” Gandhiji

Vivisection is seriously wrong on ALL counts, and those who engage in or condone it may be laughing now…that bitter laugh of the demented guilty unscathed…but they will not be laughing forever. Regardless of what “wing” you associate yourself with, lab animal research is an absolute moral crime. I wouldn’t doubt that all those bitterly defending it in here are in the business. Here’s to actual justice, at long last.

Ms. Marino is not on the radical Right. The ones who are evil are the one’s who torture, abuse, exploit, and kill innocent animals in needless, pseudo-scientific experiments.

Scientific fraud pervades the field of animal experimentation…here’s some background…. ^[8].

Good people need to start strongly reconsidering their cultural conditioning which has brought us a society that largely still sees the unnecessary, violent exploitation of animals as normal….akin to the conditioning that allowed our society, in the recent past, to see the violent exploitation of blacks as normal. It’s the same monster, just a different victimized and exploited group which makes this variation of supremacist, the speciesist…believing that because non-human animals are different that it’s morally responsible to torture, abuse, exploit, and kill them needlessly.

Aron said,

on May 4th, 2012 at 8:08 am
I can’t wait for everyone to start chiming in about how we lack empathy for disapproving of Camille Marino. And that cockroaches are sentient beings

Aron,
The question is not whether cockroaches are sentient, but whether you are.

Many of the animals tortured, maimed and SACRIFICED in laboratories are capable of experiencing both emotional and physical pain, Many of these higher level animals are also capable of compassion.

Dr Christian Barnard, one of the pioneers of heart transplant vowed never to use fully sentient animals as experiment subjects ever again after he understood the emotional pain suffered by these animals:

“I had bought two male chimps from a primate colony in Holland. They lived next to each other in separate cages for several months before I used one as a [heart] donor. When we put him to sleep in his cage in preparation for the operation, he chattered and cried incessantly. We attached no significance to this, but it must have made a great impression on his companion, for when we removed the body to the operating room, the other chimp wept bitterly and was inconsolable for days. The incident made a deep impression on me. I vowed never again to experiment with such sensitive creatures.” Dr Christian Barnard

I wonder why you are incapapable of the empathy expressed by Dr Christian Barnard.

The type of sadistic experiments conducted on fully sentient animals, if not done in a laboartory, would result in charges of extreme cruelty to animals. Similar activities in children or young adults are considered a precursor to violent criminal activity later in life. Serial killers often begin their careers, maiming, tormenting, violating animals in ways that are similar to those used by vivisectors.

The impact of such cruelty, rationalized and dismissed as necessary by the judeo.christian doctrine of dominion, is far worse on the human psyche, than any imagined benefits accrued from these sadistic experiements.

Alice said,
on May 4th, 2012 at 10:48 am
“Research involving animals is highly regulated, and great care is taken to ensure that animals are treated humanely. This is required under the law, but it’s also essential to producing meaningful research results.”

Alice,
There is nothing humane about a fully sentient animal such as monkey, a dog or a cat languishing in a cage for years with brain implants, so that their reaction to stimuli can be monitored during neuro-science experiments.

Furthermore if the conditions are so humane, why not use humans in these highly regulated and controlled experiments.

Many years ago I worked in a scientific institute that won grants using animals as subjects. It is there where I saw first hand the evil of vivisection and vowed to speak out against whenever possible. While at the institute, I was able to report two protocol violations – a cat with brain implants was denied water for 4 days prior to testing as encouragement to respond when rewarded with water.. In another instance, the brain implants from a cat were removed and the skull was left open to see how long it would take for infection to set in and for the cat to die.

The myth that animal testing is regulated and humane is not consistent with the evidence.

Because I spoke out, peacefully, every day I worked there, I was able to negotiate the release of six cats. The grant of their vivisector was not refunded and he intended to kill them as they were no longer useful to him. I found homes for 5 of the liberated cats and kept the sixth – Moxie, who was two when I took him home. He lived 21 more years of a very good cat life.

Every life is important. Every life has value. Every life is worthy of preservation.

The failure to understand this is a reflection of religious teachings that sanctify animal abuse as righteous, when neccessary.

“I have little regard for a man’s religion, whose dog and cat are not the better for it” Abraham Lincoln

Donald O’Leary, the vivisector who tortured Queenie to death is the real criminal. In India he would be charged with extreme cruelty to animals for violation of two of India’s extraordinarilly compassionate animal protective legislation:

On the first count he would be charged with taking a homeless animal from a shelter to use as an experiment subject:
“(Indian) Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act:
“Stray animals may not be used for research. The Rules for Experimental Animals, as formulated by the Committee for the Control and Supervision of Experimental Animals, state that only animals bred for the purpose of research by institutes registered by the Committee may be used for experimentation (although, of course, such animals suffer and feel pain just as much as strays or any other animal). It is illegal for any medical, educational or commercial research institute to pick up stray animals from the street or from the municipal pound for this purpose.”

Recently India also banned ALL vivisection on the college and university level:

“Rights group lauds India’s ban on animal testing
Delhi,Environment/Wildlife, Fri, 20 Apr 2012 IANS
New Delhi, April 20 (IANS) The Indian government’s decision to stop experimentation on animals for training college and university students was Friday hailed by animal rights group Humane Society International.”

With such compassionate laws in place, it would not have been necessary for Camille Marino to organize a peaceful protest or to use violent rhetoric. In India, the law is not on the side of the criminals who torture defenseless animals for glory and profit. It is on the side of the victims and those who would protect them. Instead of dominion over animals, the indian concept of ahimsa calls for mutual cooperation with them:

“Souls render service to one another” Tattvartha Sutra

The result is laws which respect animal lives and do not try to justify their abuse as humane.

Louie,
You state:

“Good people need to start strongly reconsidering their cultural conditioning which has brought us a society that largely still sees the unnecessary, violent exploitation of animals as normal….akin to the conditioning that allowed our society, in the recent past…”

I appreciate your good heart and compassion for animals, but question whether only unnecessary violent exploitation is responsible for this conditioning…. Use of ‘unnecessary’ as a qualifier, implies the existence of necessary violent exploitation.

Whether exploitation can be justified as necessary is not based on morality, but on expediency. Expediency for the victimizer, not concern for the harm done to the victim.

“If you ask anyone, what is morality based on? These are the two factors that always come out:
One is reciprocity … and a sense of fairness, and the other one is empathy and compassion. — Frans de Waal

The morality of vivisection cannot be challenged on the grounds of expediencey. It may or may not be necessary, though evidence indicates there are often unwanted harmful side effects.

There is no compassion in maiming, confining, inflicting wounds, poisoning and killing a living being capabal of experiencing pain and fear. There is no justice in harming a defenseless creature to meet human needs.
Such actions cannot be justified as moral.

The problem inherent in the biblical view of animals is that it is based on human expediency, not compassion or justice.

The distinction between expediency and morality was understood by Isaac Bashevis Singer. When asked if he was vegetarian for health reasons, he replied “yes… for the health of the chickens.”

He also understood the ramifications of a breakdown of morality, where violence to the weakest and most defenseless among us is justified as necessary:

“How can we speak of right and justice if we take an innocent creature and shed its blood?” Isaac Bashevis Singer,

Aron said,

on May 4th, 2012 at 5:23 pm

Annie,

Animals and humans do not contract the same diseases? How about HIV/AIDS, H1N1, H5N1?

Nice try, though.

Aron, I have no idea where you get your information. Chimpanzees deliberately infected with the HIV virus do not ever develope a full blown HIV infection and are therefore not a reliable model for human treatments.

A double-blinded clinical trial involving humans is the most reliable means of determining whether a treatment for HIV or a full blown HIV infection will be effective.

Best of luck to Camille!

If a Nazi organisation opened up nest door to you and refused to leave after being asked politely and with full force of reason behind you, and the authorities more or less sanctioned their behaviour by doing nothing, would you feel entitled to take the law into your own hands to physically remove them/make them scared to continue?

If you knew that innocent humans were being tortured in meaningless experiments, and you asked the person behind it to stop only to be ignored, would you take matters into your own hands?

If you knew that innocent animals were being tortured next door to you, and were ignored when you politely asked the ownerto stop, would you take matters into your own hands?

We have tried to politely ask the vivisectors NOT to abuse animals (this is the 21st Century – we have the technology available to us to ensure that other models can give us the same results, not the 19th when unfortunately vivisection was the only way to learn), but we have been constantly ignored, which leads us to wonder if the only thing that they will open their eyes to is violence against them.

I believe in non-violent direct action against property (walls can be scrubbed, computers replaced, etc – that’s what insurance is for!!) but if the only option open to us is harrassment, then so be it…..

THE QUESTION IS NOT CAN THEY REASON,NOR CAN THEY QUESTION, BUT CAN THEY SUFFER…?

YES – THEY DO!!

The real terrorists are those who torture animals to death, claiming it is necessary in the name of “science.” A just society would offer full protection for the weakest and most vulnerable. Instead, society offers protection to the terrorists as they terrorize, torture, maim and murder helpless animals in laboratories. Whether or not you agree with Camille Marino’s actions, you all know deep down in your heart that vivisection is cruel, unnecessary and unethical. Think about your own dog undergoing these invasive procedures. Think about that and then tell me why vivisectors should be allowed to continue their sadistic work.

I am heartily disappointed to see the Southern Poverty Law Center stepping in to defend those who harm and kill animals for a living. Important physiological, anatomical and biochemical differences exist amongst species which make research based on animal models an absolute crapshoot. Under the current system, we find out if a medication or procedure will be safe and effective in humans when we try it out on the first humans. Very often these medications and procedures are neither effective nor safe. Harming others for one’s own benefit is obviously a selfish and indecent thing to do.

Donna Watkins said,

on May 3rd, 2012 at 3:04 pm

“Thank you for continuing to publish incidents of animal rights extremists. Those of us who have been watching these groups know how dangerous they are. They are described with soft, safe language (bunny huggers, animal lovers) but they are terrorists.”

Donna,
I am concerned with how easily you dimiss compassion and empathy for the terrible suffering of animals trapped in scientific houses of horror.

To date, no animal activist, no matter how extreme has ever harmed or taken a human life. It is not possible to say the same for irrepsonsible vivisectors who torture and kill defenseless animals, as they put more and more dangerous drugs on the market, which have taken human lives. All in the name of profit, glory and the bibilcal god given right to kill and violate animals, as if they were innanimate objects incapable of experiencing pain and terror.

Your lack of concern for the true victims of Camille Marino’s campaign indicates a profound lack of compassion for innocent creatures who have harmed no one.

If you fear animal activists driven to save as many precious animal lives as possible, you would do well to look into your own justication for violence to animals. Perhaps the fear is a result of your aggressive view.

animal activists care about all living things……vivectors are in that far away group of “special” people who only care about being recognized in some way among their peers……it is all EGO veiled in ‘science’…..See it for what it is, don’t be naive and stubborn

To Ellie Maldonado. What is this great law that protects animals in laboratories? Animals are being tortured and die horrible deaths every day.

To Jimmy D.

What right do humans have to save them selves from disease while torturing other beings to have that benefit. Humans are selfish and cruel.

Humans have to learn to share the earth rather than taking over everything. Which humans are not doing a very good job at.

Results of vivisection and results of all experiments on the animals are not transferabled to human medicine. These “experiments“ are frauds of false scientists and also they are reasons why medicine late.By this Truth these false scientists violate human rights of humans who respect animals and also these false scientists abuse taxpayer money- they are criminals but they are protected by bad system because a system uses wrong conclussions of “scientists“ in many other levels like in this level: although homo sapiens is frugivore animal species, “scientists“ support meat/milk/eggs/bread “industries“ owners profit and like a consequence they also support pharmacological/medical“ industry“ owners profit,because they pay them for hidding a Truth.

Thinking about it for a day or so, I have to go back in and comment that history will not smile on SPLC for standing in defense of the worst slavery the world has ever spawned. As a descendant of the First People enslaved in the new world, I have to say this.

I am very saddened to say that while i have been a loyal supporter of SPLC in the past, I can no longer, in good conscience, do so.

“If you have men who will exclude any of God’s creatures from the shelter of compassion and pity, you will have men who will deal likewise with their fellow men.”

~St. Francis of Assisi

Someone has been arrested for peaceful protest against someone else who tortured, then murdered an innoccent being. And SPLC sides with the killer. Well done.

Juli,

While St Francis, used eloquent words, his language did not coincide with his lifestyle. Instead he called for compassion within the constraints of dominion, He was not a vegetarian. nor did he call for a vegetarian diet. His words are vague enougn, so as to not dissuade followers of the faith.

In some ways he is like Marie Antoinette, when confronted with the suffering of her people who did not have bread – arrogantly stated

“Let them eat cake”

So as St Francis calls on inclusion of animals for compassion… in reality his actions say:

“Let them eat meat”

Surely there is no compassion and pity for animals when we murder them for their flesh.

I have not been in her shoes and therefore cannot judge what or why she does what she does. I only know she has taken action when so many have not. Perhaps she has seen things done to animals that have broken her heart. We will only know when we have walked a mile in her shoes…….

People sit in their comfortable armchairs and critisize and judge while others take to the streets and take action. Those who do nothing can never do wrong because they do nothing while those in the arena accomplish something…rightly or wrongly. Is one better than the other?

The verdict has come down on Camille Marino’s trial and she was found NOT GUILTY:

for a brief few weeks, we all need to celebrate the defiance and strength with which she faced the enemy and won.

Marino’s Charges Dropped

?Criminal Contempt – Camille was charged with 5 criminal contempt charges (both adjudicated and pending), for violating the injunction granted to a vivisector in an attempt to silence her – CHARGES DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE
?Trespassing – Marino staged a civil disobedience to get a campaign in Detroit off the ground and protest their efforts to silence her — 30 DAYS/TIME SERVED
?Aggravated Stalking – Because of the injunction that remained in effect, Marino was charged with Aggravated Stalking for her act of civil disobedience and political dissent – CHARGES DROPPED.

This is a victory for freedom to protest cruelty and injustice, for Camille and most of all for the animals, who suffer so much at the hands of merciless vivisectors in the name of man’s dominion over the animals.