The Right to Live?????

Here’s an interesting quote  from Alex Pacheco, Co-Founder of PeTA:

We feel that animals have the same rights as a retarded human child because they are equal mentally in terms of dependence on others.
– The New York Times (January 14, 1989)

The same rights as a retarded human child?   Well, do those rights include the right just to LIVE?  How would the American public react if a group of people were going around conducting rescues which consisted of rounding up and euthanizing mentally challenged children, claiming that they are suffering or might suffer in the future?   According to James McWilliams of the Atlantic, March 12, 2012, PeTA’s kill rate for the domestic animals they take in is a shocking 99%.

Yes, thousands of helpless, healthy and adoptable animals are heartlessly euthanized each year by PeTA and they seem to think no more of taking a precious little animal’s life than they do of wadding up a piece of paper and tossing it into the trash; perhaps the trash would actually have an edge because PeTA activists are so big on the environment.

Open your eyes America!



Please read the following article at

IMPORTANT NOTE:  The information in this post came from the story at (see above link) and from a good friend of Nanette’s who was present when the cats were returned to her.  I have not personally seen the cats, the scars or the  papers from the ASPCA.

As I mentioned in a previous blog, a wise and just judge awarded Nanette Entriken’s cats back into her custody!  That decision was made almost two weeks ago, but on Wednesday, May 23,   Nanette was finally able to bring her cats home for the first time since they were confiscated a few days following the raid by the ASPCA and the Madison County, Florida Sheriff’s Department on Caboodle Ranch at Lee, Florida.   What the County of Madison, the Madison County Sheriff’s Department and the ASPCA did to Nanette was cruel and unconscionable. Throw PeTA in the mix as well since it was a video manufactured by a slick, slimy PeTA spy that motivated the carefully orchestrated raid (carefully orchestrated possibly to make a damaging impact against the passage of FARA, the proposed Florida Animal Rescue Act which was up for ratification.)

Nanette told a reporter at,  that when she  picked up her cats Wednesday, she discovered to her horror that invasive exploratory surgery had been done on all of the females, supposedly to determine if they had been spayed or not; this included Nanette’s 15 year old spayed female.  Now, if this is indeed true, the ASPCA was aware, or should have been aware that Nanette had all the medical records on hand for her cats and they could have had access to these records by either asking her or her lawyer.  By the way, according to Nanette,  all her female cats had been spayed except for a couple of females too young for the surgery at the time of their confiscation.

Let me digress a bit for those of you unfamiliar with the case.  The poor woman, Nanette Entriken,  had moved to a trailer home on Caboodle Ranch property TWO WEEKS prior to the Caboodle Ranch raid.  Nanette had been maintaining the website for the ranch from her home in North Carolina and had made the drive down to Florida monthly to work hands on with the cats.  It was her dream to move to Florida and actually work with the care of the cats on a daily basis.  This move was accomplished in late February, 2012 when she moved along with her cats to a trailer home on Caboodle Ranch property.  Although Nanette said said her cats had never mingled with the Caboodle Ranch cats or been out of her home and although she said she was assured by the Sheriff that she would not be charged and her cats would not be involved, the Sheriff’s dept. showed up on her doorstep early one morning a few days later and confiscated them all. Nanette said when she went down to the Sheriff’s Dept. to try to get them back, she was met from a representative from the State’s Attorney’s office who told her cruelly, “it will be a long time before you see your cats again. They are state’s evidence.” STATE’s EVIDENCE although they had been in the county two weeks! Later, papers were filed by the State’s Attorney’s office to take custody of her cats on the grounds that she was “unstable and unfit to care for them.” If there ever was a travesty of justice, if ever a person was unjustly victimized, traumatized and tormented by a legal system gone completely insane, this is the perfect example. I’m glad justice and common sense prevailed and she was awarded her cats back. When I found out just now about Nanette’s allegations of  unnecessary surgeries, that really made me angry.  If this is truly confirmed and can be proven, then the  ASPCA should not get away with it. Personally, I have not seen the cats, the scars or the papers from the ASPCA, but why would Nanette lie about something like this and risk bringing the wrath of the ASPCA down on her?

Please realize this is just one case out of thousands. Whether this can be proven or not, this kind of abuse of power by animal “rights” groups is happening every day in this country. No group or organization, especially radical animal “rights” activists should have the apparently limitless power they have to disrupt and ruin the lives of people and animals any time they so choose.


Incidently, in my first post I stated that if proof was not forthcoming from Nanette, I would take the post down and make apologies to the ASPCA.  I took my original post down and replaced it with this one.  That part of the bargain was kept.  As for the ASPCA, this is my apology.  I’m sorry I did not email you earlier than I did, but you have received both a message and an email from me.  I would appreciate  an answer, and welcome comments and documents from you showing your side of the story.

The respose from the ASPCA did come Monday, June 4 in an email to me from Olivia Melikhov.  The email reads as follows:

Thank you for reaching out to us. We did have a very important correction to the story, which we posted in the article comments section. The female cats were shaved simply to check first for spay scars so that unnecessary and intrusive surgery could be avoided. Only in one instance, where a scar was not apparent upon close examination by two veterinarians, was a previously spayed cat surgically opened. Her previous spay was quickly confirmed, and she was re-sutured and is doing well.

Please let me know if you  have any other questions.
All the best,