In light of this story
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/s...re/4176094.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4640199.stm

How should these more extreme protesters be dealt with? as common criminals or even as terrorists? to actually grave rob a relatives body takes them into a different league. One animal rights protester actually compared the breeding of guinie pigs for research on the farm to the Auschwitz concentration camp!! I think the full weight of the law should be thrown against them and their intolerence. I would like your opinions please.

i dont understand how things have gotten this far. this is an issue that should have been dealt with a long time ago.

does anyone remember PETA handing out that cartoon flyer to the kids of parents wearing fur at the showing of the nutcracker?

protesting has become a life of its own, and it shouldnt have gotten this far to begin with. people who resort to robbing graves and targeting young children in such vulgar ways need to be dealt with.

think about it. if one person handed out one cartoon flyer, they would have been picked up for some charge or another.

animal rights activists (not all, but some) have become so extreme they cross all sorts of legal lines: stalking, harassment, verbal assault.

so why is it okay to do these things as long as you have a name for your organization? it certainly wouldnt be okay for one individual person to do it.

and i wonder what would happen if any of these protesters got cancer or HIV/AIDS or alzheimers. would they just sit back and let it overtake them, or would they undergo treatment? treatment that is available because of animal testing?

These ghouls have fouled themselves in a way that is near other societal taboos such as cannibalism and bestiality. I say no rights for them. Hunt them down and use them as "guinea pigs" in a frontal lobotomy experiment.

The lesson I would like them to take to heart is the time they decided to free all the minks at a mink farm - thousands of them, and they then proceeded to devour every indigenous small animal in the surrounding area for miles and miles.

Ethical treatment of animals yes, but use common sense about it.

Do these people really have nothing better to do with their lives? My brain cannot fathom why people go as far as to put animal life before human rights.

I do not understand this guys, they ask for animal rights but breaking the human rights.

This was a really interesting interview I saw a while back. The problem with PETA is that they don't want us to use animals for anything other than taking photos from a distance and the occasional cuddle!

While this interview is around the practice of muesling sheep (a practice that is being phased out by 2010), check out the interviewers comment:

"If Ingrid Newkirk (head of PETA) says she won't only hurt the profits of the wool industry, she's determined, she truly believes it, that she'll shut it down forever."

She want to get rid of sheep farming altogether - presumably so that she can release sheep back into the wild. !!!!

"It's tough talk, but don't underestimate Ingrid Newkirk's power. US retail giant Abercrombie & Fitch, with over 300 stores across America, has just announced they won't buy Australian wool. It's reported PETA threatened a campaign branding them 'Abercruelty & Fitch'."

Isn't that just plain blackmail - she's saying unless you stop doing one thing, I am going to deliberately hurt your business. We elect governments to make laws. If she believes she is right, she should run for government and change the law rather than being a vigilante minority that employs blackmail as her chief tactic.

Here's another extract regarding her views on animals:

IAN MCLACHLAN: When you understand that these people are all vegans — they don't approve of eating meat, they don't approve of any of these livestock ventures, they don't approve of pets or anything else — then it is for people to make judgments about them. I mean, you just can't sit there and take it because they happen to have some view of life that most people on earth don't have.

PETER OVERTON: In Ingrid Newkirk's ideal world, all animals will live free. No-one will wear or eat an animal product, including milk or eggs. The list goes on.
Fishing?

INGRID NEWKIRK: Hunting in the water.

PETER OVERTON: Horse racing?

INGRID NEWKIRK: No. I'm not in favour of that.

PETER OVERTON: What about swatting a fly?

INGRID NEWKIRK: Well, the jury is perhaps out on insects.

She also wants her body barbequed in front of people when she dies.

I've got no problem with the ethical treatment of animals but this woman is a complete nutter. But she's also an eco-terroist - and I hope someone sues her ass right after they throw her in jail...

http://sixtyminutes.ninemsn.com.au/s...story_1287.asp

This is why extremist views, no matter Left or Right should not be tolerated.

I suppose milking the deadly snakes of the world to extract anti-venom to save lives is verboten too.

Extremist = exclusionary. Simple as that. If you are an extremist, you have no consideration whatsoever for those with a difference of opinion or desires in life.

Somebody should lock her up in a room with those high frequency sound machines that they've used to record the "screams" of plants as you cut them. "Here, Ingrid, have a salad."