I am angry, no, completely livid about the constant persecution of NFL quarterback Michael Vick.
In December of 2007, Vick was convicted of his role in an illegal dog fighting ring. He was sentenced to 23 months in prison. He served his sentence, paid his “debt of humanity” not his debt to society because he didn’t then and still doesn’t owe society nothing, not one damn thing.
A recent espn.com article written by Rich Cimini reported that, “Soon after signing a one-year contract [with the NY Jets] in March, a group in Cortland, NY—home of the Jets’ training camp—started an online petition to ban him from camp. It received more than 20,000 signatures. 20,000 signatures to ban a man from playing professional football?
Now before Michael Vick was ever discovered or convicted in regard to “the mistreatment” of animals, one of the most prominent organizations trusted with ensuring the welfare of animals was allegedly operating its own animal genocide ring that was far more diabolical and self serving than the offenses allegedly committed by Michael Vick.
As reported by wikipedia.org; “In May and June 2005, Ahoskie, NC police officers found the bodies of dozens of dogs (including some puppies) stashed in a dumpster behind a grocery store. In the course of their investigation, the police staged a stakeout and observed two people in a van with, PETA which stands for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals written on the side dumping animals into a dumpster. The two individuals, both PETA staffers, were arrested and indicted on 21 counts of animal cruelty, three counts of obtaining property under false pretenses, and 7 counts of littering. A few days after the arrests, local authorities told Greenville, NC’s WNCT-TV News they had found more than 70 additional dead animals that may be connected to PETA.
They went to trial in January 2007. If you ask PETA about the North Carolina trial, they will probably tell you that their staffers were acquitted of animal cruelty and obtaining property under false pretenses. That’s true; however, they were found guilty of littering. PETA never denied killing the animals in the back of the van, nor did they deny that some of the animals were “adoptable”. They got off of the charges largely because the state statute does not specifically penalize individuals for euthanizing animals, no matter how healthy they are. At the time that PETA was accused of these egregious violations of animal cruelty there were specific animal shelters that refused to turn over stray and unwanted animals to PETA.
According to an Associated Press article published on June 23, 2005, “Two North Carolina counties have stopped turning over shelter animals to People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals saying they were surprised the group euthanized cats and dogs instead of trying to find them homes. The Norfolk-based animal-rights group said it tried to have some of the animals adopted, but the condition of some strays and the availability of homes made it impossible. [At the time] the Bertie County Board of Commissioners voted unanimously to cut all ties to PETA, despite a written apology from its president. County Manager Zee Lamb said he believed euthanasia would be only a last resort for cats and dogs that were not adoptable. These violators [were] charged with only “littering.”
Do you think that almost destroying Michael Vick’s life and livelihood while charging other violators that committed animal cruelty with “littering” amounts to equal justice? There are no current conversations or petitions being circulated profiling the past violations of PETA, yet bleeding heart animal lovers hate, hate, and hate Michael Vick.
Do they despise him because of his dog fighting past or is the real reason because of the excess amount of melanin in his skin? Mike Vick has already paid the price for his sins but I guess that means zilch in the “court of public opinion.” Are some of these animal “zealots” stuck in the real life version of “Groundhog Day?”
Following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, moveon.org launched an online campaign calling for “justice, not escalating violence.” It collected 30,000 signers for a statement that argued: “To combat terrorism, we must act in accordance with a high standard that does not disregard the lives of people in other countries.”
I am searching for sanity. How can only 30,000 anti-war signatures initially be gathered to protest a war in which over 4,000 brave Americans were eventually sacrificed just to insure that the lives of people in other countries were not disregarded? Yet the lives and liberties of Michael Vick and many other Americans that some of these ill fated wars are supposedly fought to protect are disregarded on a daily basis. Sources for this article were; espn.com, Associated Press and wikipedia.com
(Aubrey Bruce can be reached at: abruce@newpittsburghcourier.com or 412-583-6741.)
