Student Publications
University of Houston
151C Communications Bldg
Houston, TX 77204-4015
713.743.5350

©1991-2007
Student Publications,
All rights reserved.

Last modified:

Contact:
ktruitt@uh.edu

Opinion
 

Letters to the Editor

Activist terrorism must be stopped

To the editor:

In the past, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals and its supporters have done some strange things, such as throwing red paint on people who wear fur coats and leather jackets, in an attempt to persuade people from wearing animal skin. 

The group has also broken into research laboratories and released and stolen animals and research documentation. PETA has trespassed on private property and cut down fencing and barbwire to set free cattle, which resulted in road closures, traffic and chaos. 

The FBI has investigated PETA on several occasions because it was accused of funneling money to the Earth Liberation Front, which was found to be responsible for burning buildings and blowing up Hummer SUVs, WTXX-TV in Hartford, Conn., reported. The reason for the destruction of these SUVs occurred because people think they use the most gas and pollute the most. ELF, however, failed to realize that by burning them, it released hundreds of tons of pollutants in the air. 

When Sen. Diane Feinstein, D-Calif., and Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., introduced legislation titled The Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act, I felt it was about time. 

I have no problem with people wanting to defend the rights of animals. But PETA uses this noble calling to cause destruction of private business and injury to the common man. 

If I smoke in Philip Guthrie Hoffman Hall Breezeway or parking lot, no one has the right to walk up and slap the cigarette out of my mouth. If I wear a leather jacket, no one has the right to walk up and destroy the fruits of my labor by throwing red paint on it and me. 

Besides, what do you call someone who destroys corporate, government and private property in the name of what they deem a good cause? This act is called terrorism. 

No one is saying PETA can't protest, but the bill mentioned in the Staff Editorial, "If only they could protect animals," (Wednesday, Opinion) says you don't have the right to cross the line and create chaos, destroy property or create a disturbance. 

This organization is not the equivalent of "tree huggers" as described in the editorial -- it supports domestic terrorism. 

PETA was never mentioned in the editorial by name, but it is on the forefront of animal rights activism and stands to be affected the most by the bill -- it is certainly the motive behind the legislation being introduced. If PETA is the equivalent of tree huggers as suggested by the editorial, it would have to be an organization like the ELF.

Brody Nelson
political science senior

Letters to the editor are welcome from all members of the UH community and should focus on issues, not personalities. Letters must be typed and must include the author's name, telephone number and affiliation with the University. Anonymous letters will not be published. Letters are subject to editing for clarity, language and space. Letters may be delivered in person to Room 151, Communication; e-mailed to dclettrs@mail.uh.edu ; or faxed to (713) 743-5384.