http://www.peta-online.org/news/NewsItem.asp?id=2929

PETA LAUNCHES "GLOVES ARE OFF!" ANTI-FUR CAMPAIGN WITH SKINNED FOXES AT MET GALA

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fur-Clad Opera Buffs Will Get a First-Hand Look at the Rest of Their Coats

For Immediate Release:
September 26, 2003

Contact:
Michael McGraw 757-622-7382

New York — Holding bloody, skinned animals and signs reading, "Here’s the Rest of Your Fur Coat," PETA members will greet attendees of the Opening Night Gala of New York’s Metropolitan Opera to protest the cruelty supported by those who buy and wear fur. In a preemptive strike, before cold weather sets in, the activists will confront opera attendees—who are notorious fur-wearers—with the gory reality of where fur coats come from and will hand out cards showing a photo of a trapped fox on one side and explaining the gruesome details of fur procurement on the other. The protest marks the kickoff of PETA’s new "Gloves Are Off!" anti-fur campaign.

Date: Monday, September 29
Time: 6 p.m.
Place: The Metropolitan Opera, Lincoln Center

In the aftermath of the September 11 tragedy, PETA took a kinder, gentler approach and temporarily suspended its confrontational tactics to avoid upsetting an already shell-shocked public.

So why has PETA decided to take the gloves off now? Most Americans were deeply affected by the events of September 11, but furriers used the time as an opportunity to push their bloody wares as "comfort wear." And, although many people have embraced a more thoughtful, peaceful lifestyle, animals continue to be caught in steel-jaw traps where they suffer excruciating pain, often for days, before having their chests stomped on or their necks broken by trappers. Beavers caught in underwater traps struggle frantically for up to 20 minutes before drowning. On fur farms, animals are confined to tiny, filthy cages where they suffer physical pain and psychological stress before being killed with painful methods such as neck-breaking, suffocation, and anal electrocution—which causes the animals to convulse, shake, and even cry.

"Although pelt prices have plummeted and the image of fur is in the toilet, some callous people still wear it," says PETA President Ingrid Newkirk. "Die-hard fur-wearers can expect to be confronted all winter with graphic illustrations of animals who have suffered and been slaughtered for their skins."

Persia White, star of the top-rated UPN sitcom Girlfriends, appears in PETA’s latest anti-fur ad, in which she holds the lifeless body of a skinned fox next to the tagline, "Here’s the Rest of Your Fur Coat." Persia will also be attending the protest.

For more information, please visit PETA’s Web site FurIsDead.com.

OK, right or wrong, this part makes me pause. How the hell do they know it suffers "psychological" stress? Must be an "exit" interview they do or something...

I just don't understand why someone would pay that kind of money for a coat. I suppose it's the same kind of reason someone would pay stupid amounts of money for an Escalade or Navigator.

Where and how did they get the furless animals? I believe they must have had to kill them, skin them, and then demoralize the animal for the ads. Being that I live rather close to the PETA HQ, it makes me sad that these people get attention.

You beat me too it. Where do they get these dead animals they are using to shock people with? Are they just getting lucky enough to find them on the road on the way to the protest?

BTW, I think fur coats are tacky.

I'm guessing they raid the fur farms' trash bins (pre-cremation, I guess). That or they have an insider helping them.

Yeah, tell Broadway Joe that.

You're making assumptions here. There is no way PETA is killing these animals to prove a point. Since so many animals are killed and skinned for this reason, it should be easy to find an already dead one to show it to people.

To bad they aren't cooking the bodies up first. Nothing like a smoked fox leg before an opera.

Unfortuantely....whether or not the sentiment is valid or not (that is to each person's own moral code)....PETA, by its confrontational actions and extraordinary behavior, is only doing a disservice to itself. Certainly the actions do generate PR for PETA...but one has to wonder how many potential supporters they turn away by such actions....simply because many people do not want to be associated with a group that perpetuates such extremes.

I personally hate fur coats, and tend to be a strong believer in animal rights....but I will never support PETA or its sensationalistic approaches.

Chewing gum is a far better anti-fur tool.

Man, I couldn't have said it better myself. Ditto all the way.

PETA rules

no comment......

No, PETA does NOT rule. These people are one gardenburger away from getting thrown in the same group as "right to life'rs" who shoot and kill abortion clinic workers based on their religious interpretations or stand outside the "free clinic" with six foot tall, full color placards,(that's a sign) of a 10 week old fetus. Scare tactics and visual imagery of this sort are juvenille, crass, and ignorant. And Claus, I WAS going to comment on how nice you look in your pink tutu, for shame, for shame..

Good idea!

People could pat them on the back as they come out of the theater and secretly smear gum into the fur.

Frankly I don't really care, as long as PETA can keep up its foul tactics people can keep wearing fur. I don't wear fur (I think synthetics can be used to make a warmer coat) but people raising animals for their fur isn't much differnt as people raising animals for their meat. As long as they don't waste any of the animal after using its fur I don't mind (I do think the conditions at some of the farms are inhumane and need to be fixed though).

I just think it's kind of hypocritical for somebody to think killing an animal for its fur isn't as bad as killing an animal for its meat.

You're still killing the animal, do you think the cow cares if it's used for meat or for leather? No, it's probably more concerend it's about to die.

The only way I justify eating meat is that the animal was raised for the express purpose of being eaten, and every bit of the animal is utilized (not just the meat).

True, I know there are some Vegans (a lifestyle similar to PETA, sometimes more extreme) who think killing an animal is on par with killing a human.

With that kind of thinking you're one step from killing a human to keep that human from killing an animal.

I hate animal cruelty but I don't think it's a crime that requires the death penalty.

These PETA assholes have no right to damage anyone else's personal property. If someone wants to wear fur... that is their right. It is perfectly legal. PETA is not the law.

PETA also funds assholes like the ELF. If they decided to torch your X because they think it is a threat to the environment... would you be so sympathetic?

The fur wearers are too passive. They have a legal right to defend themselves against these attacks and beat the shit out of these PETA assholes.

Well, I'm no PETA fan (man, I love a good burger) but I will defend until the day I die their right to protest.

Destroying people's property, on the other hand, should never be done. That just breeds contempt and anger.

Kinda like the Iraq War.

(Sorry, I couldn't resist. )

I tell you what. I would beat the piss out of one of these jerkoffs if they did anything to a fur someone I was with was wearing. The ELF guys should be hunted down and prosecuted as terrorists.

Terrorists? Don't you think that term is a little strong? Hunted down over a coat? Isn't this really an act of "Vandalism"? Besides, only self absorbed idiots wear $10,000 fur jackets as fashion statements. Perhaps we should look at the definition for the word "Terrorist":

terrorist

adj : characteristic of someone who employs terrorism (especially as a political weapon); "terrorist activity" n : a radical who employs terror as a political weapon

Try reading my post again slowly. Maybe you can figure out that I was talking about the ELF lunatics.

Yes terrorists. ELF has burned homes, entire lots of cars. Vandalized and destroyed vehichles numerous times, without thought as to whether or not someone could get hurt. What if there was someone in the home? What if there was someone at that dealership they burned? And even if there werent, what if a firefighter died trying to put that massive fire out. Damn right they are terrorists.

Yes, but they were burning Jeeps. They were doing us a favor.

Going by your original definition, then all arsonists are terrorists as well.

Oh Christ. I am not playing semantics games with you Sean. They have an extremist agenda, and I have heard their spokesman say that if someone was killed in one of their acts it would not change their thinking. They do more to hurt their cause than help it. The government considers them a terrorist organization, and I think it is just a matter of time before they kill someone.