People for the Ethical
Treatment of Animals (PETA)
501 Front St
Norfolk, VA 23510
Phone: (757) 622-7382
Exempt since March 1981
Description: Animal rights group repeatedly
using civil disobedience
IRS Revenue Ruling 75-384 and funding eco-terrorists directly by
2001 Form 990 tax return, Page 28, for listing of direct
donation to North American Earth Liberation Front, an FBI-declared
domestic terrorist organization) or indirectly by paying lawyers for
suspects in animal rights crime. Uses unlawful means to persuade
others to adopt vegetarian diet and to cease all use of animals.
Board of Directors
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) is one of the more rabid and radical—and influential—environmental groups on the scene today. The Animal Rights Reporter called PETA "the most influential organization in the animal rights movement." PETA "has established an impressive track record of orchestrated events which bring it media attention, movement respect, and member donations." PETA "has grown in size and scope, resembling a small corporation more than the cutting edge of a social movement."1
As an advocate of animal rights philosophy, PETA has agitated to:
—all of which is a reflection of its "vegan" ideology.2
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals is profiled in Ron Arnold and Alan Gottlieb's book, Trashing the Economy: How Runaway Environmentalism is Wrecking America
PETA promotes veganism, an animal rights philosophy far more radical than vegetarianism. Veganism, as well as it can be represented accurately, is the ideal that no animal food be consumed in any way, not even milk or eggs, and that no harm of any sort be done by humans to any animal because there is no moral difference between humans and animals. Examples: PETA co-director Ingrid E. Newkirk asserted about those who eat meat, "I would think it’s primitive, barbaric, arrogant, unnecessary."3
Production of milk or even honey is immoral since it involves "exploitation." Newkirk explained, "Most supermarket milk comes from cows raised in intensive factory farms. They stand on concrete most of their lives, they are inside most of the time, they are artificially inseminated, their young are taken away from them when they are one or two days old, they go on to become veal."4 She agreed with an interviewer that pet ownership is the moral equivalent of slavery, unless the animal needed shelter to begin with. The very word "pet" is offensive, since it "connotes a demeaning attitude of master versus thing."5
The notion of animal rights is something relatively new, something alien to animal welfare, and brimming with an agenda of disaster for people.6 This program was explicated by Australian philosopher Peter Singer in his 1975 book Animal Liberation, which challenged the notion of human dominance over other animals and contemptuously reviled animal welfare and humane treatment as just another form of "speciesism." Singer asserted, "Human beings have come to realize that they [are] animals themselves, It can no longer be maintained by anyone but a religious fanatic that man is the special darling of the whole universe, or that other animals were created to provide us with food, or that we have divine authority over them, and divine permission to kill them."7
The core of the animal rights philosophy is the dismissal of differences between people and animals—language, reason, morality, free will—as ethically irrelevant. Animal rights asserts equal moral status to all living things based on the ability to feel pain. In this ethic, all human use of animals, for food, clothing, sport, companionship, medical research, is "speciesism," the moral equivalent of racism.8
It is not clear how vegetables escape this moral calculus, since they are made of the same DNA as other life forms.
The movement’s theoretician, Tom Regan, clearly recognized one place the philosophy is taking us: to the crippling of medical science. He wrote in his 1983 book, The Case for Animal Rights, "Even granting that we face greater harm than laboratory animals presently endure if research on these animals is stopped, the rights view will not be satisfied with anything less than total abolition. The practice remains wrong because unjust.
"If abandoning animal research means that there are some things we cannot learn, then so be it.... We have no basic right...not to be harmed by those natural diseases we are heir to."9
PETA is even against dissection in medical schools.10 The Washington Post, which gives money to environmental groups, became alarmed and wrote an editorial worrying that hard-line animal activists will completely outlaw anatomy instruction with animal specimens in schools.11 It sounds to us like PETA leaders have had brain surgery by doctors trained in PETA medical schools.12
PETA activists have developed highly sophisticated attacks on industry. They use slick media campaigns and rock stars, they peddle T-shirts, sports watches and videos. They generally try to give the animal rights movement a degree of hipness that appeals to the youth market. In one campaign, Canadian singer k.d. lang made a beef-against-beef television spot in an effort to destroy the meat and animal husbandry industry.13
This animal rights group thrusts their views on big names in the fashion industry. PETA has pressured modeling agencies, photographers, and stylists to refuse to work with furs. PETA protesters staged a nasty demonstration at a 1991 Oscar de la Renta fur show.14 Three major fashion designers stopped using furs: Bill Blass, Georgio Armani, and Norma Komali, but denied PETA had anything to do with it.15 PETA pressure probably did, however, if Merv Griffin Enterprises’ example is instructive: They sent PETA a letter stating that fur coats will no longer be given as prizes on television’s "Wheel of Fortune." The syndicated show had a policy of using only ranch-raised furs, but Griffin Enterprises President Robert Murphy told PETA that all fur gifts had been eliminated.16 The pressure against wearing fur was so intense it sparked a near-violent backlash at a Hollywood fund raiser for animal rights.17
Fortune magazine flippantly described British-born PETA co-director Ingrid Newkirk as "the Mother Teresa of rabbits," but acknowledged that she has imposed PETA’s ethics on companies such as Benetton and Noxell "the same way trains impose themselves on stalled sedans." Running over industry roughshod is a favorite pastime of environmentalists. Companies are like trees in the sense which John Muir once complained that "trees cannot run away; any fool can destroy them." The same is true of companies. They cannot run away either, and any fool can destroy them with a little persistence. PETA has the persistence.18
PETA’s protests against animal testing of cosmetics, applying cosmetics to animals’ eyes or skin to test for toxicity and safety, caused Avon so much distress that the company announced in June 1990 it would suspend the tests—with no reliable alternative to determine the safety of their products to their customers.19 PETA also constrained Tonka to stop safety testing Play-Doh on rabbits. Other companies that have stopped safety tests because of PETA demands include Revlon, Faberge, Mary Kay Cosmetics, Amway, Mattel Toys, and Hasbro. Even though each of these companies denies that PETA agitation had anything to do with their decision to stop safety testing, there was no other reason for them to stop.20 In addition, a PETA Catalog offers a video of product testing on rabbits at Biosearch, a Philadelphia laboratory, claiming the exposé by "one of our undercover investigators" to have been "instrumental in the banning of these cruel tests by major companies including Avon, Revlon, Benetton, and Estee Lauder."21 The National Institutes of Health and the American Medical Association have expressed concern over what PETA and other animal rights groups are doing to public health and safety.22
Zoological societies are also under attack by PETA, which seems to want all zoos shut down.23
To PETA, homo sapiens seems to be the only species that may be abused. Ingrid Newkirk said about people, "We’re the biggest blight on the face of the earth," and in the same interview volunteered the macabre thought, "Human euthanasia would be a great step if there were no abuses."24 Medical research to save children’s lives is improper, since "you have no right."25 PETA certainly deserves honorary membership in Wild Earth’s Voluntary Human Extinction Movement: PETA’s Newkirk declared in a now-famous 1986 interview the oft-reprinted quote, "I don’t believe human beings have the ‘right to life.’ That’s a supremacist perversion. A rat is a pig is a dog is a boy." Even the truculent environmentalist Audubon magazine panned Newkirk for such virulent misanthropy.26
Again, it's not clear how vegetables can be eaten by such sensitive lovers of all life forms. Perhaps PETA fails to hear their pitiful screams of pain as they slide down human throats.
It hardly needs saying, but devaluing human life and deifying animals is a dangerous development in a society into which, as P.T. Barnum once observed, "There’s a sucker born every minute." Self-loathing is a time-honored indoor sport among us human beings. The trouble is, when reduced to a plan of action in a gullible society, the game of self-loathing usually divides into two camps, loathors and loathees, one of which staffs the ovens while the other goes up in smoke. Our most recent animal rights regime was run by one Heinrich Himmler, whose immortal thoughts on Jews, Gypsies, Blacks and homosexuals echo down to us through the years: "We Germans, who are the only people in the world who have a decent attitude toward animals, will also assume a decent attitude toward these human animals." The audience applauded.
It couldn’t happen here? It is happening here. PETA is happening here. As the human advocacy group Putting People First said in court records about PETA: "In their eyes, those who do not share their philosophy—animal trainers, hunters, fishermen, cattlemen, grocers, and indeed all non-vegetarians—are the moral equivalent of cannibals, slaveowners, and death-camp guards, and must be dealt with accordingly."27 Barnum was right. To the Egress.28
Most PETA supporters do not know about the group’s vegan agenda and follow the group because they believe it is effective in pushing the cause of humanity to animals. Here we see a pattern common to American environmental groups: The leaders have a radical agenda, but the followers do not, yet help them with money and memberships anyway.29 As H. L. Mencken said, "No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public."
Critics, however, have a way of making things clear: Ted Nugent, rock star and bowhunter, was quoted by the Texas Wildlife Association as saying, "These animal rights freaks are to wildlife what Jim and Tammy Bakker were to religion."30
PETA was the brainchild of doctor’s-son Alex Pacheco -- he has now moved on from PETA to head an animal rights fundraising organization -- who was raised from infancy in Mexico and grew up in Ohio, where he graduated from high school and entered Ohio State University, planning to become a Catholic priest. Pacheco says that his interest in animal rights originated during a 1978 stay with a friend in Toronto during which he visited a slaughterhouse, a visit which traumatized him so much he became a vegetarian on the spot. His visit was followed by indoctrination by "two brilliant activists," one a founder of American Vegetarians and the other an "artist, feminist, and animals rights activist."31 He got a copy of Peter Singer’s Animal Liberation. The die was cast. Pacheco quickly founded a campus animal rights group and hasn’t stopped since.32
But there’s more to it. The ancestry of Pacheco’s People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals can be traced in a roundabout fashion to 1962 England and the Hunt Saboteurs Association. HSA specialized in "hunt sabs," disrupting fox hunts by spraying artificial fox scent designed to throw the hounds off the trail and also vandalizing hunters’ vehicles—tire slashing, windshield smashing, and the like. The HSA created the pattern that would dominate animal rights activism to this day: It operated as a loosely organized underground attack group, but worked in tandem with an aboveground group, the League Against Cruel Sports, which conducted aboveground lobbying and public relations campaigns just far enough away from the HSA to avoid prosecution.
The HSA was one of a number of early British animal rights groups, the most important of which was the Animal Liberation Front, founded in 1976 by convicted animal rights criminal Ronnie Lee upon his parole after serving one year of a three-year prison sentence for a series of firebombings against laboratories as a member of the Band of Mercy. Lee had founded the Band of Mercy in 1972 as a splinter from the HSA, which Lee saw as being insufficiently direct.
Lee joined with thirty supporters to form the Animal Liberation Front and immediately returned to vandalism and arson. Lee said, "The attack on the Charles River Laboratories was the first ALF activity; vehicles were damaged, and several thousand pounds’ worth of damage was caused."33 In its first year of operations, ALF inflicted a quarter-million pounds sterling in damage. Its targets included any institution in any way connected with animals. Butcher shops, furriers, animal breeders, chicken and beef farmers, fast food outlets, and horse racing tracks were all hit. ALF smashed the windows of several halal [Islamic] butcher shops in Bedfordshire; smashed the windows of six shops in Banbury for displaying circus posters; planted a bomb under the car of a cancer researcher.34
Even the dead were not safe from Animal Liberation Front terrorism, which set out to shock the public out of its apathy about animal mistreatment. In January 1977 three ALF activists broke into the graveyard of St. Kentigern’s Church in the small Lake District village of Caldbeck to desecrate the grave of Robert Peel, the legendary huntsman and most English of folk heroes, who had lain there a hundred and twenty-three years. They smashed his headstone and dug up the grave. The activists, who did not bill the desecration as an ALF raid, even called the media to report they had exhumed Peel’s remains and thrown them in a cesspit. The police found no evidence of this, but discovered a stuffed fox’s head in the dug up grave. One of Ronnie Lee’s colleagues, Mike Huskisson, and two other activists were captured and sentenced to nine months in jail for the desecration.35
There followed a decade of increasing violence as the animal rights movement radicalized in the United Kingdom. In 1982, the Animal Rights Militia, actually ALF members using another name, sent letter bombs to the Prime Minister and the leaders of three political parties, with one exploding and injuring an office worker; firebombs were hurled at the homes of four staff members of the Willcome Foundation’s laboratories and the homes of two directors of the British Industrial Biological Research Association. The cars of two BIBRA staff members were bombed. In 1984 Scotland Yard established a special squad and an Animal Rights National Index for the protection of researchers and investigation of animal rights terrorism.36
More recent acts of Animal Liberation Front terrorism in the U.K. include firebombing of numerous fur-selling department stores,37 firebombing of medical research universities,38 and the bombing of researchers’ cars39—one of which bombs permanently injured an infant.40
In 1979, just before Alex Pacheco founded PETA, he got a summer job on the Sea Shepherd, the ship financed by Cleveland Amory’s Fund for Animals and operated by defrocked Greenpeacie Paul Watson. Sea Shepherd Captain Paul Watson was at that time obsessed with destroying a particularly infamous whaling boat, the Sierra. He caught up with the vessel off the coast of Portugal, chased it into Leixoes harbor and rammed it. The whaler was towed to Lisbon harbor for repairs where Sea Shepherd supporters later blew it up with a military bomb. Watson had already scuttled the first Sea Shepherd in Leixoes harbor to prevent it from being sold to pay for his damages to the Sierra.
Some romanticized stories say that Alex Pacheco was part of the ramming crew and was briefly jailed in Portugal, but there were only three men on the Sea Shepherd when it attacked the Sierra, and Pacheco was not one of them.
Pacheco actually went straight to England, where he joined the Hunt Saboteurs Association. There he learned the ways of animal-rights ferocity with gusto. "I had a lot of fun," Pacheco said of his Saboteur experience. "There was a lot of excitement."
Part of Pacheco’s English excitement was meeting Kim Stallwood, a young and politically savvy animal rights journal editor with the traditionalist British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection.41 Stallwood himself was far more radical than BUAV’s somewhat genteel and graying membership, openly supporting ALF with sympathetic coverage in his periodical, Liberator. Another one of those aboveground-belowground relationships. Six years later, Stallwood was to have every member of BUAV’s executive committee he disapproved of removed, a slick trick accomplished by bussing two-hundred black-clad radicals to an election meeting long remembered for its cries of "Fuck the rich!" which reduced the "menopausal old bitches," as one young firebrand called some of the elderly members, to tears.42 Stallwood was later to become a key player in PETA.
Pacheco returned to the United States and transferred to George Washington University where he became a political science major. While volunteering at a local dog pound he met Ingrid Newkirk, who worked there. He shared with her his copy of Animal Liberation and gained a new convert.43 He incorporated People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals as a Delaware corporation in July, 1980, with co-director Ingrid Newkirk. Newkirk had previously been a deputy sheriff, a Maryland state law enforcement officer—evidently all in animal control capacities—and chief of Animal Disease Control for the District of Columbia’s Commission on Public Health.44 She, like Pacheco, is one tough cookie. Now America had an animal rights group run by a doctor’s son turned Sab and a cop gone sour.
PETA assembled a core-group of eighteen members that met in a Takoma Park, Maryland basement. PETA’s first operations were in 1980 picketing a poultry slaughterhouse in Washington. In April 1981 the group demonstrated at the National Institutes of Health against animal research. A month later PETA began its now-infamous attack against Dr. Edward Taub, a behavioral scientist of national standing, whose work was largely devoted to the rehabilitation of stroke and head injury victims. A fellow scientist told a Baltimore Sun reporter, "In addition to his landmark studies of the recuperative potential of damaged nervous systems, Dr. Taub’s contributions to the relatively new discipline of biofeedback have vast and immediate therapeutic implications in such diverse areas as psychiatry, neurology, cardiology, and gastroenterology...in fact, to speak merely of his ‘contributions’ is to minimize his efforts, as Dr. Taub is actually one of the founding fathers of this field."45
Dr. Taub came to the attention of PETA because Alex Pacheco found his name on a list of government research grant recipients, he was the closest researcher to Pacheco’s Takoma Park home, just a short distance away in Silver Spring, Maryland, and because Taub used monkeys in research to help stroke and head injury victims regain use of paralyzed limbs.
Dr. Taub at the time was studying deafferentation, the loss of all sensation in a body part—although some control over movement returns, in practice, most affected limbs atrophy and become useless. Through research with monkeys, Dr. Taub discovered that paralysis in surgically deafferented arms and legs was only temporary, and that the monkey could thereafter be trained to use the limbs. Dr. Taub discovered the crucial fact that in humans, the loss of use was not the direct result of stroke or injury, but of frustration and inability to learn to use a limb that cannot be controlled through the instinctive sense of feel. The benefits patients have received from this discovery are beyond measure.46
Alex Pacheco infiltrated Dr. Taub’s laboratory, posing as a student interested in his research. He seems to have been following the action plan recommended in the animal-rights manual Love and Anger by Richard Morgan. "Since most researchers don’t think there’s anything wrong with what they’re doing, they might even be willing to discuss their research with you, as long as you approach them innocently."47 Dr. Taub suspected nothing.
Pacheco ingratiated himself with Dr. Taub, volunteering to work at night, and Taub gave him the keys to the place. Pacheco secretly took pictures of conditions in the lab that he thought were "horrifying," and took them to New York animal rights groups. Cleveland Amory, who had financed the Sea Shepherd ramming of the Sierra in 1979, gave Pacheco money to buy a better camera and some walkie-talkies, which enabled Pacheco to photograph inside the lab while staying in touch with a sentry posted outside to warn of any unexpected visitors.48
When Dr. Taub went on vacation for two weeks in August, 1981, he left the monkeys in the care of lab assistants with whom Pacheco had struck up a friendship. One day, one of the lab assistants improperly lashed an experimental monkey known as Domitian to a "chairing" device in a shocking quasi-crucified pose. While the lab assistant was out of the room, Pacheco took pictures of the setup.49 He later used one of the photos in a poster emblazoned with the motto: "This Is Vivisection. Don’t Let Anyone Tell You Different." Thus a photo of an improper setup became the emblem of the animals rights movement against animal suffering.
While Taub was on vacation, two graduate student lab assistants mysteriously failed to show up for work to clean the cages or feed the animals on certain days. John Kunz, the graduate student left in charge of the place, said, "Both of them stopped coming in. They called in with different excuses. I didn’t come down on them hard. In hindsight, maybe they were taking advantage of that situation."50 On days when the lab was improperly staffed and in disarray through no fault of Dr. Taub, Pacheco brought in sympathetic academics and animal rights activists, including members of the Humane Society, on unauthorized "tours" of the lab.51
Pacheco then obtained affidavits from his "tourists"—as a lawyer described it, he "covered himself with paper"—stating that the monkeys were living in poor and unhealthful conditions. He took the photos and affidavits to local law enforcement agencies, who agreed to obtain a search warrant to raid the lab and seize Taub’s animals—but not before animal rights activists spent days building cages to house the 17 monkeys that would be seized. The night before the raid, Pacheco and Newkirk smuggled in one final witness, veterinarian Richard Weitzman, who did not agree that the animals were in any danger and said his reaction was, "Why didn’t you confront the gentleman and tell him what’s wrong and have him fix it?" Pacheco and Newkirk did not inform Weitzman of the next morning’s raid. When Weitzman heard about the raid on the news, he said, "I knew there was something not too right about this. I felt they were people who were against the research more than anything else."52
Police executed a search warrant and seized the monkeys on September 11, 1981. PETA promptly ran a large fundraising ad based on the story. Readers were exhorted to "be part of a historical first" by sending money. Contributors were told "Money is urgently needed for civil legal costs, expert witnesses, other professionals, etc. for this on going project," although the only legal action pending was one brought by the State.53
The prosecuting attorney, Roger Galvin, brought a 17-count information [indictment without grand jury] against Dr. Taub, of which 11 counts were dismissed at trial, 5 ended in acquittal, and the one remaining was overturned and dismissed upon appeal.54
The single residual charge was failure to provide adequate veterinary care for six of the animals. Seven veterinarians gave testimony on that count regarding the advisability of bandaging nerve-severed limbs. Five had expertise in deafferentation, and supported Taub’s decision not to use bandages. Two vets with no specific expertise held that he had been negligent in omitting bandages. The court sided with the two dissenting opinions and found Taub guilty of one charge of animal cruelty. His conviction was overturned on appeal and four scientific societies also exonerated him in independent investigations.
Roger Galvin, however, may not have been the impartial official he was supposed to be: He shortly helped to found the California-based Animal Legal Defense Fund, which began working in cahoots with PETA.55
PETA paid no attention whatever to Dr. Taub’s inconvenient acquittal—they continued to fundraise on the case, peddling a $15 videotape in their PETA Catalog (Item No. 6506), The Silver Spring Monkeys, which smears Dr. Taub as if he had been convicted. The sales blurb said, "Alex Pacheco narrates the story of the first-ever police raid on a research laboratory...and the first and only U. S. criminal conviction of an experimenter on charges of cruelty to animals."56
Cleveland Amory, founder of The Fund for Animals, got in on the Taub case and wrote a tidy little hatchet piece in the New York Times headlined, "Needless Cruelty to Animals," which reinforced PETA’s misrepresentation of Dr. Taub’s work and conviction.57
The Taub case put PETA on the map. It was only the beginning. A year later, the Animal Liberation Front burglarized laboratories at the University of Pennsylvania Head Injury Clinic which were developing therapies for serious head injuries based on research using baboons—research which helped develop antitoxins that counteract the effects of stroke or trauma and greatly limit the damage.58 The ALF stole 6 years worth of research data in their first break-in, including videotapes of the injuries and treatment, also doing extensive vandalism to computers and medical equipment. ALF during its second break-in stole animals being used in research on arthritis and Sudden Infant Death Syndrome. PETA immediately distributed ALF news releases attacking the research and making it look as bad as possible.59
The ALF had uncovered something serious in the Penn case, unlike the Taub farce. From the 60 hours of videotape ALF stole, PETA edited down a 26 minute indictment of technicians making crude remarks while performing non-sterile surgery on inadequately anesthetized baboons. The tape had been shot by the researchers themselves. The evidence was incontrovertible.
The reaction was overwhelming. PETA members staged a sit-in at National Institutes of Health on Rockville Pike in Washington, D.C. Secretary of Health and Human Services Margaret Heckler suspended funding for the Penn project. The NIH slapped Penn with a citation for "material failure to comply with Public Health Service policy for the care and use of laboratory animals." The U. S. Department of Agriculture, which is responsible for enforcing the Animal Welfare Act, stuck Penn with a $4,000 civil penalty. Ultimately, the Head Injury Clinic was closed.60
As the Daily Pennsylvanian reported, "The incident gained national press attention, culminating in an appearance on the Phil Donahue Show by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals’ co-founder Ingrid Newkirk.... The University remained the center of controversy when the California-based Animal Legal Defense Fund threatened to file suit."61
PETA still fundraises from copies of the tapes ALF stole, hawking in its catalog a $15 videotape titled Unnecessary Fuss described as "rare and stunning footage, filmed by researchers themselves" which gives "a unique and in-depth view of how experimenters abused baboons."62
PETA forwarded copies of the documents stolen by the Animal Liberation Front—PETA says it does not accept stolen materials for legal reasons, but does accept copies of them—to the Animal Legal Defense Fund for legal consideration. ALDF’s annual report brags that it was involved in defense of activists facing "criminal charges arising from the break-in at the University of Pennsylvania Head Injury Laboratory and the showing of the videotape... After the receipt of 60 hours of head injury videotapes by PETA, ALDF attorneys began a series of FOIA requests." The annual report also notes ALDF’s victory in preventing grand jury testimony relating to the break-in, and in five of their attorneys overseeing "the highly successful NIH sit-in, which is credited with forcing the final closing of the head injury laboratory."63
Within a short time, animal rights terrorism surged in the United States. PETA made no effort to hide its encouragement of this activity. A November, 1983 Washington Post article on Ingrid Newkirk, who had just resigned from the D. C. Animal Disease Control Division, noted that during her five years in that Division, "Newkirk has endorsed—and on occasion served as intermediary for—a clandestine group called the Animal Liberation Front, whose members have stolen research animals from Howard University and a U. S. Navy lab in Bethesda."64 One of PETA’s Factsheets stated:
The Animal Liberation Front’s activities comprise an important part of today’s animal protection movement just as the Underground Railroad and the French Resistance did in earlier battles for social justice. Without ALF break-ins at the University of Pennsylvania Head Injury Clinic, the City of Hope in Los Angeles, and at many other facilities that had successfully sealed their atrocities from public scrutiny, many more animals would have suffered....
What you can do:
Offer a permanent home to rescued [i.e., stolen] animals: contact PETA for information. Support PETA’s Activist Defense Fund, which helps pay legal fees of individuals accused of liberation-related activities. Blow the whistle on facilities where animals are forced to suffer. You may now be working in such a place, or be willing to take a job to keep a particular laboratory or animal supplier under surveillance. All contacts are kept in strict confidence.65
It was clear that PETA had established itself as the aboveground lobbyist parallel to ALF as the underground terrorist exactly on the British model.
In July 1989, ALF burglars broke into and entered the laboratories of Dr. John Orem at Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center. ALF burglars stole his personal records, his research animals, spray-painted his walls, and destroyed more than $50,000 worth of equipment. Dr. Orem had been investigating Sudden Infant Death Syndrome. "SIDS is the leading killer of babies in the first year of life," according to Dr. John Remmers, a leading pulmonologist. "We have no idea how to prevent it or treat it. We need to understand the activity of the nerve cells in the brain that regulate breathing during sleep. Until this happened to Dr. Orem, he was the only one in the world getting at the fundamental causes of SIDS."66
Orem had trained a small number of cats through behavioral conditioning to hold their breath briefly so he could monitor brain-cell activity during apnea, or breathing interruption. He implanted electrodes into the brains of the cats with such sophisticated painless techniques that they carried on normal lives in his lab, playing, eating, sleeping, roaming around at will. His data-gathering capabilities were equally sophisticated, allowing him to obtain meaningful information with a minimum of experimental animals, fewer than ten each year. The National Institutes of Health said Orem’s veterinary practices were a model of excellence and federal inspectors consistently found his lab exemplary.
PETA immediately used the felonious raid as a basis for fundraising, touting the burglary in its newsletter, interviewing two of the ALF burglars,67 and giving out Dr. Orem’s home address, urging readers to "write polite, respectful letters," but also enabling PETA members to harass him.68 PETA also offered a $15 video (Item No. 6509) titled No Gravy for the Cat, which their sales pitch described as "An exposé of John Orem’s ride on the federal grant gravy train and the story of five cats slated for death in his laboratory at Texas Tech and how they escaped with their activist liberators on the underground railroad."69
Also in 1989, on April 3 the Animal Liberation Front broke into three buildings at the University of Arizona, stole more than a thousand animals being used in medical studies, vandalized equipment to the tune of $300,000 and destroyed two research laboratories, a research center, and an off-campus office by gasoline fires.70
Twenty-four hours later, ALF released a videotape of the destruction, filmed by its own crew, to one local TV station, Channel 9. Transmitted via satellite from the headquarters of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) in Washington, D.C., to Channel 9 [in Tucson, Arizona] the tape was shown on the three major television stations as the lead story on their evening news reports the day after the attack.71
As a result of these raids, the FBI has formally classified ALF as a terrorist organization. The FBI considered ALF responsible for more than a hundred criminal attacks, including three classified as domestic terrorism.72 PETA, the aboveground ally of underground ALF, provides aid and comfort, publishing full-page ads in PETA’s journal, with photographs of stolen animals and proclamations that "All these animals were rescued by the Animal Liberation Front" and the "ALF Credo," which includes the commitment "To economically sabotage the industries of animal exploitation."73 Alex Pacheco has stated bluntly, "Damaging the enemy financially is fair game."74
The animal rights movement is doing a good job of trashing the economy while getting rich itself. The 1980s saw the establishment of at least seventy animal rights groups and an increasing shift of traditional animal welfare organizations toward animal rights causes. By the end of the decade, Fund for Animals had an income of $1.8 million and assets of over $2 million; Animal Protection Institute had a $2.6 million income; Animal Welfare Institute had $404,998; Friends of Animals brought in $3.4 million. Just these five outfits commanded an income of more than $15 million atop assets of nearly $7 million.75
Legal action—lobbying and litigating—has shut down research projects worth hundreds of millions of dollars.76 Laws restricting the use of pound animals in medical research have raised costs prohibitively, killing projects in transplant and cardiovascular research requiring dogs and cats.77 Illegal action has taken an even worse toll. Over the past ten years, raids have caused more than $10 million in damage in the United States. But the moral bankruptcy of the movement has wrought truly dreadful human costs, with raids delaying and stopping research projects on SIDS, infant blindness, cancer, AIDS, and many other diseases that plague both people and animals.78 PETA not only condones such attacks, it offers a legal pamphlet about them.
PETA published a pamphlet, Activism and the Law, counseling that there may come a point in any public struggle when "a law once obeyed reluctantly or uncritically is discredited," and suggests that "more and more people" are "deciding there is a higher law than that written by those who subjugate the helpless." It counsels that while the decision to undertake "illegal actions" may be unpopular, "no struggle against exploitation has been won without them."
The pamphlet also makes it clear that the "discredited" laws PETA activists may disobey are not just municipal ordinances against sit-ins, but also the statutes prohibiting burglary, arson, and grand larceny. PETA further points out that "today’s legal system is a nightmare for the police officer: a poker game in which all the best cards seem to be in the defendant’s hand," since "judges dismiss cases for cryptic, technical reasons." The message, evidently written by Ingrid Newkirk from her law enforcement experience, is not a "Law and Order" complaint. It is virtually legal advice for potential lawbreakers: "PETA urges all activists contemplating or fearing brushes with the legal justice system to do their ‘homework,’ & offers this pamphlet as a brief introduction to encounters with the law."79
The pamphlet gives legal counsel to prospective criminals and others in the form of a sample hypothetical case: "Brown and his female companion are stopped by the police at 8 pm as they are walking on the public road in the vicinity of the burglary of a primate research center. Brown is carrying a backpack." PETA activists are advised how to deal with the legal situation of suspect Brown after he and his companion are stopped:
The officers ask the couple who they are and what they are doing. Brown responds that they are just out for a walk. As he reaches into a coat pocket to pull out a wallet, one of the officers spins him around, pats down his clothing, and pulls out the sole contents of the other pocket: a map of the research center with the surveillance camera and burglar alarm locations clearly marked.
The officers order Brown to open his pack. Brown refuses to do so, stating that the pack contains only camping gear. The officers arrest Brown, search his pack and discover burglary tools and stolen research files.
Brown’s female companion has provided identification, but refuses to answer any of the officers’ questions. They tell her she must accompany them to the station. At the station, Brown’s companion is told by police that Brown has admitted his involvement in the crime—although he has not done so—and that the judge will go easy on her if she doesn’t complicate the case. She confesses.
Meanwhile, Brown is not read his rights until being interrogated six hours later at the police lock up. During questioning he admits that he broke into the center.
The pamphlet, PETA said, "should assist the reader in answering" a set of 14 legal questions, including, "Will the frisk be upheld by the courts?" and "Was the discovery of the map sufficient to warrant Brown’s arrest?" and "Does Brown’s companion’s refusal to answer questions count against her?" and "Is her confession admissible?" With major headings such as "Silence is a Suspect’s Best Friend," "Probable Cause," "Police Orders," and "Stop and Frisk," the pamphlet tells how to deal with misdemeanor charges ("painting slogans on a butcher’s truck" or "interrupting a fur show") and felony charges ("burning a laboratory building" or "liberating animals valued at over $100").
Here we have a non-profit organization providing a written legal primer concerning the commission of a crime. PETA complains when animal-rights criminals are prosecuted.80
PETA goes a step further: it pays the legal expenses of animal rights criminals when apprehended and arrested. In the case of Roger Troen, who was arrested for taking part in an October 1986 burglary and arson at the University of Oregon, PETA paid his legal fees of $27,000, and informed its members in January of 1989 of the payment. After Troen’s conviction in January 1988 of theft, burglary, and conspiracy, he was ordered to pay restitution of $34,900. PETA defector Gary Thorud said of Troen in a sworn deposition, "We were illegally funding this individual with money solicited for other causes, and Ingrid [Newkirk] was using that money, bragging to the staff that she had spent $25,000 in the case." PETA sued Thorud for making this and other anti-PETA statements, and vigorously denies that the use of such funds was illegal.81
Another animal rights activist, Fran Stephanie Trutt, was convicted of possessing pipe bombs and successfully prosecuted for attempting to murder the president of a medical laboratory with a radio-controlled, nail-studded bomb.82 PETA’s Form 990 Return of Organization Exempt From Income Tax for the fiscal year beginning August 1, 1988, shows that PETA contributed $7,500 to her legal expenses.
Biomedical researchers are perplexed at finding themselves polarized at one end of the spectrum of debate on the issue of animals and research, although they do not represent extreme views. The Journal of the National Cancer Institute commented, "At the other end are those who truly do represent extreme, radical views—[People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals] or any number of active groups."83 The polarization has put all medical scientists who use animals at risk.
PETA has a long memory and seems never to forgive an opponent: In January 1990, ALF burglarized the office of University of Pennsylvania veterinary scientist Dr. Adrian Morrison, stole his personal correspondence and vandalized the room.84 His offense? He had testified on Dr. Taub’s behalf nine years earlier, and spoke up for the value of Dr. Orem’s work, and—sin of sins—criticized PETA.
As the Philadelphia Inquirer reported of a PETA demonstration at Penn, "Morrison’s office was broken into January 14. The militant Animal Liberation Front took credit. Yesterday, PETA released what it said was a ‘preliminary examination’ of copies of documents taken in the break-in. The review concluded that Morrison had written letters supporting other researchers and that he planned to oppose certain ‘animal protective’ legislation."85
When Village Voice published a story on animal rightist objections to Morrison’s research, PETA sent out copies of it to a number of people who lived near Morrison, along with a letter saying, "Please see the enclosed Village Voice cover story involving your neighbor Adrian Morrison who lives at [home address]," enabling readers to harass him.86 PETA’s newsletter bragged: "Tired out from the ALF raid on his Penn lab, Adrian Morrison got a grant to spend a month in Italy this summer visiting fellow cat-electrode implanter Pier Permeggani at the University of Bologna. See how tight funds are? Sure there were sightseeing trips, expensive dinners and vivisection stories swapped, but the real highlight of Morrison’s trip was being discovered, exposed and picketed by Animal Amnesty, a PETA contact group. Thanks to the activists, there really is no rest for the wicked."87
Alex Pacheco brought Kim Stallwood to the United States in 1986 to serve as executive director at a salary of $41,000 (1989). PETA members and supporters began a corporate takeover campaign against animal humane groups similar to the coup which Stallwood had pulled off in England with the British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection. According to the Boston Globe, "A PETA consultant won control of the Toronto Humane Society, endowed with $14 million, last fall through a proxy fight. One of her employees recently was arrested for possession of explosives and weapons, and vandalizing a restaurant that served chicken."88
PETA activists also took over the $8 million-endowed New England Anti-Vivisection Society in a two-fisted proxy fight. The Boston Globe reported, "The wife of Gary Francione, a PETA executive and a Pennsylvania attorney, walked into the Anti-Vivisection Society’s Boston headquarters a few months ago and purchased 300 voting memberships for $3,000 in cash.... A surge of several hundred applications for voting membership arrived at the headquarters in bulk...."
Alex Pacheco set up the Action Campaign Fund to subsidize or pay full airfare to Boston for voting activists all over the nation. According to the Boston Globe, "One activist from a Midwestern state described how more than two dozen tickets had already been reserved with PETA’s permission."89 PETA’s Alex Pacheco and Ingrid Newkirk, along with Dr. Neal Barnard of PETA-ally, Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, were voted onto NEAVS’s board of directors, thereby giving them access to the $8 million fund balance.
To prevent the same thing from happening to themselves, PETA made sure that their organization does not have 325,000 members as claimed, but exactly three: Chairman Alex Pacheco, director Ingrid E. Newkirk, and secretary/treasurer Sue Brebner. This three-member board of directors of PETA in 1987 voted themselves the only "members" of the organization. The move has a simple explanation: under Delaware non-profit corporation law, "members" have a right to vote for the board, remove directors for cause, and examine the corporate books. By amending their original Articles of Incorporation, the three-member board was able to convert their "members" into mere contributors, and the board into a cozy little self-perpetuating multi-million dollar trio.90
In 1990, PETA boasted an income of $6,793,809, of which slightly over $1.1 million was spent on fundraising.91 Its operations were backed by nearly $2 million dollars in assets and a staff of sixty-five employees.92
Throughout America PETA activists have blocked laboratory entrances, picketed rodeos demanding an end to all cowboy sports, released gory video footage of health and safety test animals, broken up stockholder meetings, tried to shut down zoos, and sued in the courts to stop all health and safety testing on animals. PETA has successfully shut down at least 10 animal research labs.93
To gain access to corporate stockholder meetings, PETA has bought more than $40,000 worth of stock in a dozen major corporations that sell animal products or use animals in health and safety tests. PETA has introduced animal rights resolutions at annual meetings of IBM, Procter & Gamble and Gillette. Frankie J. Trull, president of the Washington-based Foundation for Biomedical Research, which supports the use of animals in health and safety research because alternative methods are less reliable, says "PETA or groups like PETA have intimidated researchers."94
A September 1992 report by the National Charities Information Bureau (NCIB) determined that PETA did not meet several standards for acceptable charities. NCIB said PETA spends too much on fundraising and too little on programs. With 42 percent of PETA’s organizational expenses devoted to fundraising, it couldn’t possibly meet the standard requiring at least 60 percent of all expenses be spent on programming. NCIB also reported that only 20 percent of PETA’s budget is directly tied to "research and investigations" of "animal cruelty," which means that PETA’s mailing might mislead donors by inferring that donations will be used to help animals, when nearly half of the money collected is used to raise more money. PETA’s board of directors consists of only three members, violating the standard of a minimum of five members. Board President Alex Pacheco’s salary, paid by PETA, also violated NCIB guidelines.95
1 Animal Rights Reporter, September 1, 1990.
2 Quotes from City Paper Interview and PETA News. "Vegan" commentary from Alston Chase column, Washington Times, August 7, 1990.
3 City Paper Interview, p. 47.
4 City Paper Interview, p. 43.
5 City Paper Interview, p. 42. For extended commentary on pets, see "The Dreaded Comparison: Race and Animal Slavery," book review of Marjorie Spiegel’s The Dreaded Comparison, in PETA News, January/February 1989, p. 11.
6 "Activist Ingrid Newkirk fights passionately for the rights of animals, some critics say humans may suffer," by Susan Reed, People Weekly, October 22, 1990, p 59.
7 Animal Liberation: A New Ethics for Our Treatment of Animals, Peter Singer, New York Review distributed by Random House, 1975.
8 "Are animals people too? Close enough for moral discomfort," by Robert Wright, The New Republic, March 12, 1990, p. 20.
9 The Case for Animal Rights, Tom Regan, University of California Press, Berkeley, 1983.
10 "Animal rights activism threatens dissection," by Constance Holden, Science, November 9, 1990, p. 75.
11 "The dissection debate," editorial, The Washington Post, May 3, 1991, p. A24.
12 "Tactics turn rabid in dissection war," by Gayle Hanson, Insight, September 23, 1991, p. 18.
13 "Big stink in the beef belt," Time, July 16, 1990, p. 51.
14 "What’s new in fashion? Stripped-down protesters," by Woody Hochswender, The New York Times, May 14, 1991, p. B7.
15 "Furor over fur coats heats up: rights groups are using aggressive tactics to demand more humane treatment of animals," by Elizabeth A. Brown, Christian Science Monitor, January 17, 1990, p. 12. See also "Grand illusions: as the controversy over wearing fur rages on, there are—at last—some stunning fakes," by Candace Bushnell, Health, September, 1989, p. 72.
16 Washington Post, July 16, 1990.
17 "Revolt of the fur bearers," by Nina Darnton, Newsweek, January 6, 1992, p. 49. See also "Champions of synthetic fiber, angry human stars make the fur fly at a benefit for animal rights," People Weekly, March 6, 1989, p. 266.
18 Fortune, January 1, 1990. See also "The outlook for veal parmigiana, the honesty industry, double taxation at 3 a.m., and other matters," by Daniel Seligman, Fortune, March 27, 1989, p. 163.
19 "Avon’s move to halt its animal testing wins qualified praise from protesters," by Jeffrey A. Trachtenberg, The Wall Street Journal, June 23, 1989, p. A9.
20 "Revlon, Inc. calls a halt to all animal testing," The Wall Street Journal, July 3, 1989, p. 11. See also, "Animal testing feels the heat," by David Christian Smith, The Christian Science Monitor, October 15, 1990, p. 12.
21 PETA Catalog, no date, Washington, D. C. , p. 27.
22 "Animal rights vs. research? A question of the nation’s scientific literacy," by Dennis L. Breo, The Journal of the American Medical Association, November 21, 1990, p. 2564.
23 "Just too beastly for words: zoos are becoming an endangered species, beset by financial crises and targeted by animals rights activists," by Jesse Birnbaum, Time, June 24, 1991, p. 60.
24 City Paper Interview, p. 42.
25 City Paper Interview, p. 44.
26 "Fuzzy-Wuzzy Thinking About Animal Rights," by Richard Conniff, Audubon, November 1990, p. 127.
27 Brief of Amicus Curiae, Putting People First, in the case People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals v. Bobby Berosini, in the Supreme Court of the State of Nevada, No. 21580, September 27, 1991. A summary of the full brief was allowed in the appeal.
28 One of Barnum’s legendary impostures was a sign in his most crowded circus exhibit building, "To the Egress." His eager mass of customers hurried their leisurely stroll past the bearded lady and Siamese twins to see what kind of exotic creature an Egress might be, not knowing it was an overglorious synonym for "Exit."
29 "Animal Worship II: the threat to U.S. health and welfare mounts," by Robert M. Bleiberg, Barron’s, November 13, 1989, p. 9.
30 Texas Wildlife, Newsmagazine of the Texas Wildlife Association, December, 1991, Vol. 7, No. 8.
31 "The Silver Spring Monkeys," by Pacheco and Francione, in In Defense of Animals, edited by Peter Singer, Blackwell, New York, 1985, p. 135.
32 "The Great Silver Spring Monkey Debate," by Peter Carlson, Washington Post Magazine, February 24, 1991, p. 17.
33 Animal Warfare, David Henshaw, Fontana Paperbacks, London, 1989, p. 191.
34 Animal Warfare, David Henshaw, Fontana Paperbacks, London, 1989, p. 53-54.
35 Animal Warfare, David Henshaw, Fontana Paperbacks, London, 1989, p. 57.
36 Daily Telegraph, November 17, 1986, p. 2.
37 "Animal rights activists jailed for store bombs," The Independent, London, June 8, 1989.
38 "Animal rights terrorists bomb university," by Paul Stokes, The Daily Telegraph, February 24, 1989.
39 "Two Bomb Attacks on Scientists in the U.K.," by Jeremy Cherfas, Science, June 22, 1990, p. 1485.
40 "Woman in bombing condemns attackers," The Times (London), June 12, 1990.
41 Deposition of Alex Pacheco, in the case of Berosini v. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, et al., at Las Vegas, Nevada, March 9, 1990.
42 Animal Warfare, David Henshaw, Fontana Paperbacks, London, 1989, p. 160-164.
43 "Are animals people too? Close enough for moral discomfort," by Robert Wright, The New Republic, March 12, 1990, p. 21.
44 Public Interest Profiles, 1991-1992, p. 555.
45 Baltimore Sun, November 11, 1981.
46 See Taub, "Somatosensory Deafferentation Research with Monkeys: Implications for Rehabilitation Medicine," in Behavioral Psychology in Rehabilitation Medicine: Clinical Applications, 1980.
47 Love and Anger: An Organizing Handbook for Activists in the Struggle for Animal Rights and In Other Progressive Political Movements, Richard Morgan, second edition, Westport, Connecticut, Animal Rights Network, 1981.
48 Washington Post, October 11, 1981, p. B7. See also Washington Post Magazine, February 24, 1991, p. 18.
49 Draft of "Correction and Clarification," reached by the Multi-Door Dispute Resolution Division of the District of Columbia Superior Court, David R. Anderson, Esquire, mediator, the in case Alex Pacheco v. Katie McCabe, Civil Action 90-0A01627, February 15, 1990.
50 Washington Post Magazine, February 24, 1991, p. 18.
51 Science, December 11, 1981.
52 Washington Post Magazine, February 24, 1991, p. 18.
53 Paid advertisement by PETA, Washington Post, September 20, 1981.
54 Taub v. State, 296 Md. 439, 463 A.2d 819 (Md. 1983).
55 Brief of Amicus Curiae, Putting People First, in the case of PETA v. Berosini, Appeal to the Supreme Court of the State of Nevada No. 21580, September 27, 1991.
56 PETA Catalog, no date, Washington, D. C., p. 27.
57 "Needless Cruelty to Animals," by Cleveland Amory, New York Times, September 17, 1989, p. E23.
58 "Stroke Therapy," Zivin & Choi, Scientific American, July, 1991.
59 New York Times, June 15, 1984, p. A1.
60 "Protesters prompt halt in animal research," by Jennie Dusheck, Science News, July 27, 1985. See also "HHS halts animal experiment," by Barbara J. Culliton, Science, August 2, 1985.
61 Daily Pennsylvanian, January 15, 1990, p. A4.
62 PETA Catalog, no date, Washington, D. C., p. 26.
63 "University of Pennsylvania Head Injury Laboratory," in Newsletter, 1985 - The Year In Review, Animal Legal Defense Fund Newsletter No. 1, 1986, p. 2. See also, "Protesters prompt halt in animal research," by Jennie Dusheck, Science News, July 27, 1985, p. 53.
64 Washington Post, November 13, 1983, p. A1.
65 "The Animal Liberation Front: Army of the Kind," PETA Factsheet Miscellaneous #5, no date, Washington, D. C.
66 Telephone interview, June 1992. See relevant comments in "Blood feud: researchers begin fighting back against animal-rights activists," by Deborah Erickson, Scientific American, June 1990, p. 17.
67 "ALF Talks!" PETA News, November / December 1989, p. 17.
68 "Bloody Good Work," PETA News, May / June 1990, p. 4
69 PETA Catalog, no date, Washington, D. C., p. 26.
70 "Battling the Animal Liberation Front," by Assistant Chief Harry R. Hueston II, University of Arizona Police Department, Tucson, in The Police Chief, September 1990, p. 52.
72 Terrorism in the United States, 1989, Terrorist Research and Analytical Center, Counterterrorism Section, Criminal Investigative Division, U. S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Washington, D. C., December 31, 1989.
73 PETA News, Washington, D. C.
74 "Raiders of the Research Ark," by Elizabeth Carpenter, City Paper, Washington, D. C., December 18, 1987, p. 14.
75 Data from New York and West Virginia Departments of State 1989 registrations for respective groups.
76 "Behind the laboratory door," by Peter Haskell Bresnick, The Progressive, March 1990, p. 20.
77 "Animal research: ten years under siege," by Christopher Vaughan, BioScience, January 1988, p. 10.
78 "No longer dismissed as weirdos, animal-rights groups are now threatening medical research," by Fred Barnes, Vogue, September 1989, p. 542.
79 Activism And The Law: A Legal Primer, PETA flyer, no date, two sides of one sheet, Washington, D. C.
80 "U. S. accused of trying to smear animal rights group: members say felony trial of leaders is due to pressure from medical, research interests," by Paul W. Valentine, Washington Post, December 7, 1989, p. A17.
81 Deposition of Gary Thorud in the case Berosini v. PETA.
82 "A Bombing Is Thwarted In Norwalk," by Robert D. McFadden, New York Times, November 12, 1988, p. 29. "Woman in Bomb Case Gets 3-Year Probation," by The Associated Press, New York Times, January 9, 1990, p. B3.
83 Journal of the National Cancer Institute, May 22, 1989.
84 "Animal rights group ransacks professor’s office at Vet School," by Jeremy Selwyn, The Daily Pennsylvanian, January 15, 1990.
85 Philadelphia Inquirer, February 4, 1990, p. 2B.
86 Letter on PETA letterhead dated May 8, 1990, addressed to a resident of the same street as Morrison and signed by "Ann Chynoweth, Researcher."
87 "PETA Smells a Lot of Bologna," PETA News, September / October 1990, p. 26.
88 Boston Globe, April 10, 1987, p. 23.
89 Boston Globe, April 10, 1987, p. 23.
90 Certificate of Amendment of Certificate of Incorporation of People for Ethical Treatment of Animals, Inc., filed March 16, 1987.
91 New York State Department of State financial report summary for PETA.
92 New York State Department of State financial report summary for PETA, and Better Business Bureau report, June 1989.
93 "Protesters prompt halt in animal research," by Jennie Dusheck, Science News, July 27, 1985, p. 53. See also "Picketers ride animal rights full tilt to the rodeo arena," by Glenn Emery, Insight, April 16, 1990, p. 20. See also, "Animal rightists raid USDA lab," by Constance Holden, Science, September 4, 1989, p. 1099.
94 "Behind the laboratory door," by Peter Haskell Bresnick, The Progressive, March, 1990, p. 20. See also, "Animal research: ten years under siege," by Christopher Vaughan, BioScience, January, 1988, p. 10.
95 Reported in People’s Bulletin, by Kathleen Marquardt, December 20, 1992, p. 2.