5. Oct, 2014

PETA exposed as a fraudulent organisation.

     Now that People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals,(PETA) has gone quiet for some months over the treatment of Sheep in Australian shearing sheds. It is a good time to review the enormous amount of publicity they received. 

     It is annoying that PETA were able to fool so many gullible people with their fraudulent films of alleged abuses, though very well made, still fraudulent. They were only able to convince those that knew nothing of the Wool Industry. 

     Let me put some of their outlandish claims to rest so that hopefully we never hear of PETA again. 

     They made so many ridiculous claims it is hard to know where to start, I will begin with Jason Baker. He wrote of 235 abusive incidents in 19 Shearing Sheds in three States of Australia. This doesn't jell and is unbelievable. An average sheep is worth about $100. Who would allow the deliberate mistreatment of any stock worth that much, even at $10. each, it wouldn't be allowed.  By Owners, Managers or the Boss of the Board.Jason will not name any of the alleged Shearing Sheds despite repeated requests, and he had the alleged shearers faces pixelated, which indicates a high degree of expertise in film making. Why when PETA claims it wants to abolish animal abuse, then hide the identity of abusers.

     The alleged Shearing Sheds are obviously film sets. The viewer should note the one where the top of the picture indicates the inside of a large white Marquee behind the catching pens,as the most obvious fraud.( this scene now appears to have been deleted some time after we drew attention to it)

      Jason Baker gives away his nationality away as American when he wrote of " Crew supervisors" in Shearing Sheds, which proves he has never been into a working Australian Shearing Shed.

       Other supporters whose comments I have read are obviously gullible. Maria P repeatedly writes of "bad cookies" we can all guess what she means. Then she wonders how others recognise that they are from the cities.

       We must realise that the films produced are needed to extract donations from the gullible, without which the organisation could not function, US $ 35,000,000. per year according to PETA's web site. Some of which would produce a lot of film, anything will do to sustain this organisation. e.g. The photo of a sheepskin and head on the ground in some drafting yards is not a very nice photo, but it is not cruelty, Just used to extract more money from their naive supporters.

       For PETA to refute this criticism all they need to do is tell us the names of the 19 properties where the alleged abuses took place. This should be very easy to do, but will never happen because it is all a money making racket, and the properties do not exist.

                     Other educational pieces on PeTA  can be read on Overview dated.

                 29 Nov 2015 ,  11 Sept 2014 , 3 Sept 2014, 19 July 2014.and 9 Aug 2014.

                                       More to follow if they return.