40 Company Secrets These People Have Revealed Since They Don’t Work There Anymore Or Just Don’t Care

Nestle owns a lot of products that look like they are owned by a different brand--but nope, Nestle is the parent company. Very shady.

They will go wherever they can.

I thought US labor and environmental laws would prevent this. But the US can be bought by corporate lobbyists. So I’m too naïve

oh no they're own Fancy Feast. Our two sister cats won't eat anything else but the one can they like. (it's the brown one, I can't remember what it is. They like it in gravy, won't eat it in paté)

I know! mine love the shrimp and tuna that has a full shrimp in each can. I think that might be chicken flavored gravy lovers. We switch up flavors a lot. Now we have to try something else. At least meow mix is still safe.

Thank You!

Oh please do tell us what you think are the "straight facts," and don't forget to cite your sources.

Another Dear PETA: If all animals wanted to live outside then why do the cats who we adopted run away from open outside doors? All of our animals have the chance to run away, but they never do. The one time our dogs ran out the door they went to the end of the driveway and stopped and looked at us like "are you coming?" and then we called their names and they came running back.

I don't trust them and I have researched PETA for over twenty years. But no matter what sources I would site - this issue is just going to be too divisive.

google is free.

https://www.nathanwinograd.com/peta-its-the-familys-fault-we-stole-and-killed-their-dog/

This comment is hidden. Click here to view.

Citation please

www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/wbna16930039 www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/03/petas-terrible-horrible-no-good-very-bad-history-of-killing-animals/254130/ time.com/4127919/virginia-family-dog-euthanized-peta/ huffpost.com/entry/killing-animals-petas-open-secret_b_59e78243e4b0e60c4aa36711

https://www.nathanwinograd.com/linked/peta2010.pdf

@miles i presume that was to me. This was the freely available data from Virginia, lodged by PETA. It doesn’t, as far as I can see, support @Yet’s allegation in any way. As you asked before, I’m not actually defending the organisation. I am though becoming very suspicious of the allegations, mainly due to their hyperbolic nature and the complete lack of evidence. When someone has an allegation they need to support it, it’s not anyone else’s job to dispute.

This comment is hidden. Click here to view.

https://spotlight.peta.org/petasaves/

(Lavor I have to reply to your comment because Julia's has been rightfully downvoted) I find it funny that Julia sources her information directly from PETA. That'd be like sourcing your facts from a website that you made up. Multiple sources are good, so you can get your facts straight and find the best answer.

This comment is hidden. Click here to view.

@Lavor. Please provide verified sources of this allegation. If you cannot you are at best passing on gossip, at worst you are knowingly libelling.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/aug/17/peta-sorry-for-taking-girls-dog-putting-it-down

Thanks Nicole, an article from a reputable source. Synopsis: PETA apologises unreservedly for the mistaken euthenisation of a dog that was picked up running loose. In a joint statement with PETA, family accepts the apology, agrees that compensation offered by PETA reflects the scale of loss. The article is from ‘17, the incident almost 10y ago.

Numbers are from PETA's own reporting - this shows the kill rates VS other places and over a few years https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=76e6ec43-e192-4dca-b1ca-b12e4a0e74b5

@scribbles Be careful please. Lexology is not associated with PETA, and the author of that post is a lawyer that has experience in corporate legal action against welfare charities. John L Simpson is a partner in DuaneMorris, an international corporate legal firm which, amongst other sectors has specialists in the animal agriculture business. This is easily findable following the links that you provided

I don't know how any of the above info matters, and of course you would want the data to be from someone not associated with them to avoid bias. Such as the Virginia Dept of Agriculture: https://www.nathanwinograd.com/linked/peta2010.pdf Their kill rates has been extremely high for years. They euthanize adoptable animals. That is the accusation. Nicole gave you an example, albeit dated (and I would argue that 6 years ago is hardly "almost 10"). I'm not sure why you are defending them so strongly. There is PLENTLY of journalism out there documenting this problematic organization. Their ethics have been in question for years, and their defenses weak.

As for why Lexology, a corporate legal research provider, hosting opinion pieces from a corporate lawyer with experience in suing welfare charities who is a partner in a corporate firm which counts pharma and agri amongst its clients is relevant… I’m not sure how you can believe that it’s not an odd set up to say the very least

So specifically and quantitatively, in one sentence, what IS your allegation?

No defence, I’m challenging the allegations - why indeed are people so keen to attack this particular organisation with what has so far been baseless and or vague allegations? The Virginia data has been quoted before and is open report not disputed by PETA, and without any context demonstrate little more than PETA meeting their obligations by sharing their data with the authorities in Virginia.

@scribbles the data merely corroborated that PETA employs euthanasia. This is not in dispute, and PETA are open and clear when and why, as you point out in your second post, and in numerous other people’s posts my own included Exactly what are you accusing the organisation of?

Virginia Department of Agriculture & Consumer Services shows significant increase in "death rate" for 2021 - 83% https://zoos.media/media-echo/peta-shelter-2021-death-rate-increases-significantly/?lang=en

Im sorry you’re being down-voted for asking for a source. Have my upvote, I support learning and facts!

https://www.nathanwinograd.com/peta-its-the-familys-fault-we-stole-and-killed-their-dog/

That would contradict PETAs joint statement with the family in the incident (in 2014) where PETA unreservedly apologised, and paid compensation both of which the family accepted, as reported in the press in ‘17. But please, what exactly is your allegation relating to the OP, and what is the corroborating evidence?