PETA founder Ingrid Newkirk.
(Beth Clifton collage)
by Steve Hindi, founder, Showing Animals Respect & Kindness [SHARK]
As we head into 2022, I’d like to raise an issue––bullying––that has been a persistent problem in the animal advocacy cause. You might not think that bullying would be an issue in the realm of animal protection, but it is, and has been for a long time.
A very recent instance of bullying is to be found in the December 31, 2021 ANIMALS 24-7 report Wildlife Friends to evacuate Phuket Zoo; PETA did zip but claims credit, which focused on eleven tigers and two bears held in the woefully substandard and now defunct Phuket zoo in Thailand.
(Beth Clifton collage)
Diverted public support with false claim of “victory”
The Wildlife Friends Foundation of Thailand is willing to rescue these animals, but they need funding. Unfortunately, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals [PETA] swooped in, claiming it somehow achieved a victory that was actually “won” by the COVID-19 pandemic shutting down Phuket tourist traffic.
This was ten years after PETA appears to have––just once––said anything about the zoo.
Although PETA successfully drew attention (and donations) to itself with the “victory” claim, PETA will not rescue the animals, and has not donated, or offered to donate to either the Wildlife Friends Foundation of Thailand, or the Save Elephant Foundation, which recently rescued the zoo elephants.
These are the organizations who are actually doing the rescuing, will care for the animals afterward, and desperately need the money.
(Beth Clifton collage)
Credit-stealing is profiteering
By falsely claiming credit, an opportunistic, bullying PETA diverts public support that should go to the Wildlife Friends Foundation of Thailand and the Save Elephant Foundation.
PETA’s credit-stealing is not animal protection. It’s profiteering that actually endangers a legitimate rescue effort.
(Beth Clifton collage)
No accident
What PETA did was no accident. Groups like PETA, the Humane Society of the United States, the American SPCA, and other large organizations, as well as some smaller organizations and individuals, have long engaged in credit stealing.
Most of the people in this so-called movement ignore this behavior, or even reward it with their donations. This has always seemed odd to me, given that we are supposed to be “ethical.”
Palouse worms lack a spine, but they don’t steal from other animals. (Beth Clifton)
Animals pay for credit theft with their lives
Perhaps some people are unaware of what is going on, but my three-plus decades of experience indicates that those who are knowledgeable just don’t have the nerve, or spine, to call this opportunistic bullying out when it happens, and it happens a lot.
The problem with ignoring this behavior goes far beyond mere bruised egos, or hurt feelings. Credit-stealing in many cases is literal theft, and animals may pay for the theft with their very lives.
The current case in Thailand is an excellent example. Similar has happened to Showing Animals Respect & Kindness on many occasions, at the hands of PETA, HSUS and others, so I know the damage it causes to our efforts to help animals first-hand. No money means no activity, no resources (investigators, equipment, vehicles, travel expenses) –– no nothing.
(Beth Clifton collage)
Silence guards the gold
PETA founder and president Ingrid Newkirk’s response to being outed follows a predictable pattern: silence. Not a single word.
Is this what we should expect from the head of the world’s largest animal rights organization?
If there is a defense for what PETA did, I’d like to hear it. If there is no defense, shouldn’t there be an apology, and perhaps a substantial effort to make the Wildlife Friends Foundation of Thailand and its rescue plan whole?
Instead, Newkirk’s response is nothing. That’s the same response we get from animal abusers –– like when SHARK catches the rodeo mafia shocking horses, or covering up animal deaths, or when we catch pigeon shooters burying wounded but still living victims.
(Beth Clifton collage)
Ingrid Newkirk & Alex Pacheco
I expect our opposition to run and hide, because they’re animal abusers. In the case of the Phuket Zoo rescue, however, It appears there is no defense, so there is no response from the person who is most responsible, and is unquestionably in charge. In this movement, that is, or at least should be inexcusable, and it is far from being the first time.
Consider the case of 600 Million Stray Dogs Need You founder Alex Pacheco, who also co-founded PETA with Ingrid Newkirk back in 1981. Pacheco’s decades of outright thievery of millions and millions of clueless donor dollars for his fictitious sterilization cookie has for years diverted resources from legitimate organizations’ efforts to develop real sterilization programs.
See FDA verdict on Mifrepristone upstages more nonsense from Alex Pacheco and Spay/neuter popcorn? It’s as real as Alex Pacheco’s s/n cookies!
(Beth Clifton collage)
“Newkirk lacks integrity, but at least she is consistent”
Except for ANIMALS 24-7 and SHARK, virtually no one says a thing. In fact, the person who worked with Pacheco for years, and perhaps knew him best –– Ingrid Newkirk –– is silent. Her integrity may be lacking, but at least she’s consistent.
PETA has “Ethical” in its name, but the group’s ethics seem to be otherwise in very short supply. Unfortunately, ethics are an endangered quality with numerous organizations in animal protection. Nevertheless, we as a movement want people to follow us when we tell them to refrain from animal products, and to treat animals with kindness.
Steve Hindi. (Beth Clifton collage)
Hold individuals & organizations accountable
We ask people to clean up the way they treat animals, but we have demonstrated that we are unwilling to clean our own house. Anyone who thinks this kind of contradictory, hypocritical behavior will sell in the real world is just delusional.
With the new year, I suggest we resolve to be truth-tellers, and to hold individuals and organizations responsible for their claims and actions. How about we no longer tolerate the scammers and thieves who steal from the animals we all claim we’re trying to help? Imagine how things could change for the better if money given for animals actually went to help those animals?
Will this resolution result in some upheaval and debate? Sure it will, and that will be a good thing. I used to believe that peace in the movement would lead to more productivity, but it has instead led to quiet bullying, profiteering, and deception, and more and more animals suffer and die.
(Beth & Merritt Clifton)
The scamming and thieving bullies know they can manipulate the ignorant to fill their pockets with money only so long as the rest of us are unwilling to speak out.
Society has come to see bullying as a problem that should not be tolerated.
Isn’t it time for us to catch up?
Please donate to support our work:
www.animals24-7.org/donate/
Related Posts
More predators in animal charity than remain in the wild- Karen Davis, Ph.D., United Poultry Concerns founder, dead at 79
- Charreada steer-tailing & horse-tripping defense flunks history, art, & logic
- HFA & SHARK lawsuit hits Boone County, Illinois, for permitting steer-tailing
- Calves’ tails yanked off & horses flogged to start charreada season
- Will Delaware bust cockpit exposed at SHARK/AWA media conference?
Stealing credit for work they did not do is par for the course for groups around the world. Running other groups down is another major issue.
It is not “running other groups down” to point out credit-stealing, corruption, malfeasance, and other behavior on the part of organizations that diverts resources away from actually helping animals, misleads the public into believing that positive changes are being made that are not, and inflates the reputations of the unethical and unscrupulous at the expense of the honest and considerate.
ON POINT !
Yes! Thank you Merritt, Beth, and Steve Hindi!
Ever since I started advocating and working for animals, I have been painfully aware of the fact that the animals’ worst enemy by far is the infighting and dishonesty in the “animal rights and welfare” community.
Along with the cruel, violent, sociopathic, psychopathic, and uncaring, the worst criminals are the morally bankrupt, who are very well represented by the UNethical organization sucking up more of gullible donors’ hard-earned contributions as I write. With “friends” like those…
Sharing, as usual, with gratitude.
I learned a long time ago that the animal rights movement, begun by on-the-street activists ( even PETA at one time ), was coopted by competing organizations that had the initial financial support to nurture small and then evetually huge marketing budgets. This has all but eliminated grassroots animal rights, narrowing our options from local and collective outrage and engagement to the check writing. So much of what I tried to do over the last 35 years has been cannibalized by large groups, boardroom consensus strategies and media blinding fraudulent claims of success. No space for involvement anymore outside my check registry. Where are the thousand flames of indignation that arose during the 90’s? Replaced by a mail box filled with direct mail appeals? I blame large groups lke HSUS and PETA for destroying the animal rights movement which to my mind is no longer an upswelling of public indignation over injustice and the treatment of animals, but a competitive corporate kleptocracy. Oh wait, there is pet adoption. I have better uses for my discretionary funds. Population control would be a goood place to start. Would that cut into HSUS’s annual budget? Oh! sorry.
Here’s a grassroots animal-rights group deserving of support: Direct Action Everywhere.
ANIMALS 24-7 recommends extreme caution. Direct Action Everywhere, debuting in 2017 according to IRS Form 990, has so far demonstrated the ability to turn out lots of young activists for protests, attract a lot of media attention with flamboyant events of little if any discernible focus, disrupt Democratic candidates campaigns while ignoring Republicans, raise a lot of money while hiding most of it in a parallel entity called Friends of Direct Action Everywhere, & boost founder Wayne Hsiung (who has apparently now left the organization) to minor celebrity status, while during the Hsiung years anyhow, looking much like a personality cult. Overall, Direct Action Everywhere, after five years of existence, much resembles PETA after five years, i.e. in 1985. (See Animal advocates have races to watch in NYC, Denver, & Berkeley, too.)
I have great admiration for Animals 24-7, SHARK, and many other small, but effective organizations. However, from my personal experience, I don’t know if I would even be aware of any of them if I hadn’t been drawn in by HSUS and PETA. Back in the 70’s, I went to a conference where I heard the speaker from HSUS talk about the abuse of farmed animals. It was the first time I had ever heard anyone dare to raise that issue, for fear of losing the support of their meat-eating members. When PETA began to make mainstream news, it was even being discussed in the very conservative office where I worked. It was an ardent PETA member who sent me my first issue of what was then Animal People newsletter. To this day, I send donations to groups like Soi Dog Foundation, Tsunami Animal/People Alliance, and Help Animals India that I doubt I would ever have heard of without Animal People. When I mentioned to my husband that I just didn’t know which of the many groups to support first, he gave me what I still regard as wise advice. He said that the big organizations are able to lobby congress, etc., and that I should send the smaller and less frequent donations to them so they could count me as a member when pointing out their number of supporters to Congress, industry groups, or others. However, he said it was better to give bigger or more frequent donations to the small groups, who would give me “more bang for my buck”. Just sayin’.
Neither Steve Hindi of Showing Animals Respect & Kindness nor Beth & I here at ANIMALS 24-7 allege that PETA, HSUS, the ASPCA, the Best Friends Animal Society, & the other mega-bucks animal charities do no good at all. Indeed, it would be difficult to raise and spend the amounts of money that they do while accomplishing absolutely nothing, though a $7-million-a-year organization calling itself SPCA International appears to come close. However, organizations raking in multi-millions should be above stealing credit for the accomplishments of smaller organizations working diligently on a shoestring, and stealing their donors too.
I understand your point, and agree whole-heartedly with you and Steve Hindi on the issue of PETA or any other group stealing credit for things done by someone else. Just wanted to point out that the larger groups do act as a kind of “gateway drug”, if you will, to motivate and educate some of us in the first place. My appreciation and gratitude for those of you doing so much with so little, and at such great personal sacrifice remains unbounded.
Marilee, you raise a good point about the visibility of the large groups. Neither we nor the Cliftons at Animals 24-7 are working toward their demise. What SHARK advocates is treating these organizations the same was as any other corporate profiteers, which is what they have become. If donors would educate themselves about what is really going on, they could spur these groups to do better, and to tell the truth. This would lend credibility to animal protection generally.
Oil companies, tech companies, government, etc., all need guidance from customers, taxpayers, or whoever is involved in their goods and services. In our case, donors should guide the organizations they support, and demand high performance, but donors have largely abdicated that responsibility.
Groups and individuals in animal protection pull shenanigans because they know they can get away with it. If they were held to account by their donors, a lot of things would change, and quickly. Much of the responsibility for the sorry condition of the animal protection industry is the spectacular ignorance of donors, who give more thought to what vegan restaurant they will go to, or which t-shirts to buy at a conference than what groups are actually getting things done for animals.
I don’t like calling out groups for being liars or scammers. Any time Animals 24-7 or SHARK goes after a group, or an individual, we ALWAYS give them an opportunity to respond, just as we do with our opposition on animal issues. We strive to be accurate. It should tell people something when the people we expose have nothing to say in their defense.
I agree! I also thank you for opening my eyes to PETA and especially HUSU! They seem just evel to me, especially when you realize that the heads of the organization have no care for a woman who was clearly a family friend and allowing her to be killed by her pit bull, lying about it, blaming the victims and the rest of the evil behaviors tells me they’re souless money grubbing sociopaths! The ONLY thing I see good about Newkirk is that she’s not deluded about Pit bulls and has the guts to be honest but I have been seeing other problems with their chimpanzee rescue not truly rescuing them. Anytime you have chimpanzee living in better conditions I they research facility than in the rescue facility then that’s a big problem!