On the targeting of undergraduates by animal rights extremists (and the dangers of victim-blaming).

This morning, the Speaking of Research blog brings news of an undergraduate science major targeted for daring to give voice to her commitments:

Earlier this week, the animal rights extremist group at NegotiationisOver.com posted an email they received from Alena – an undergraduate student at Florida Atlantic University – in response to their attempts to solicit local activists to attend an animal rights event:

Actually, I’m an undergrad researcher aiming to work at Scripps [Research Institute]! I currently test on animals and think that it is perfectly fine. In fact, it is the one of the only ways that we, scientists, can test drugs in order to treat human diseases. I’m sure someone in your family or even a friend you know has suffered from a disease or pathology that was treated (or cured) by medicines THAT ONLY CAME INTO EXISTENCE BECAUSE OF ANIMAL TESTING.

First off, we applaud Alena for standing up for what she believes in and for expressing support for the humane use of animals in research aimed at addressing the health and welfare of humans and animals alike. Not surprisingly, however, NIO launched an offensive of degrading and hateful emotional abuse that caused Alena to plead for them to:

…please stop saying such horrible, untrue things about me. It’s hurtful.

In response, they no doubt ratcheted up the threats, causing Alena to:

…denounc[e] animal testing and my involvement in it…. I will be looking for other career choices.

Not unlike perpetrators of child and spouse abuse who use fear of further attacks to ensure silence in their victims, NIO hopes that flooding the email boxes of young people with obscenities and rabid missives will ensure that the voices of scientists of tomorrow are suppressed. Even for NIO, this is a new low, and Speaking of Research sharply condemns those who chose to act like shameless bullies when harassing, threatening and intimidating any student, researcher or faculty member.

I'm guessing at least some readers, reading this, are thinking to themselves (or hollering at the computer screen), "Well, what did she expect? You can't engage rationally with animal rights extremists! Sending that email to the extremist website was a rookie mistake, and now she'll know better."

Undergraduates may well be "rookies" in certain respects, but damned if I'm going to encourage my undergraduate students to give up hopes of rational engagement with the other people with whom they have to share a world. Giving up on rational engagement is how you end up with the current state of politics and "governance" in the United States. We can do better.

Anyway, I hope that a moment's reflection will persuade you that blaming the victim of the harassment here is just as inappropriate as blaming victims of bullying or rape. "If she had just done X, Y, or Z differently, this wouldn't have happened to her!" Coming at it this way may convince you that you are safe from such harassment because of how you are doing X, Y, and Z. You aren't. The extremists can decide to target you regardless of what you do or don't do.

Really.

The undergraduate targeted here by extremists was involved in research with fruit flies. And extremists have targeted scientists who no longer perform animal research (and their children). Indeed, they have targeted people who don't do scientific research at all (like me) who have dared to express the view that animal research might be the most ethical of our options.

The extremists are not choosing targets because of what they do or how they do it. Rather, just existing in the public square with a view different from theirs seems to be enough.

Indeed, the extremist website Negotiation is Over offers its readers step by step advice on how to target undergraduate students in the life sciences:

How to Shut Down Vivisectors-In-Training in Three Easy Steps

  1. By and large, students pursuing careers in research science truly want to help people, not victimize animals. Their indoctrination into the world of laboratory torture is slow, methodical, and deliberate. While they are being groomed, we are obligated to intercede and educate these young scientists with truth. As Alena admitted, “I was naive…I really just did not know about all this stuff.” And she is not unique.
  2. Students also need to understand that making the wrong choice will result in a lifetime of grief. Aspiring scientists envision curing cancer at the Mayo Clinic. We need to impart a new vision: car bombs, 24/7 security cameras, embarrassing home demonstrations, threats, injuries, and fear. And, of course, these students need to realize that any personal risk they are willing to assume will also be visited upon their parents, children, and nearest & dearest loved ones. The time to reconsider is now.
  3. Like all young adults, college students are acutely concerned with how they are perceived by their peers. They need to maintain a certain persona if they wish to continue to enjoy the acceptance of their community. This makes them infinitely more susceptible to negative and inflammatory publicity than their veteran-mutilator counterparts. When education fails, smear campaigns can be highly effective. Abusers have forfeited all rights to privacy and peace of mind and, if an abuser-to-be should fail to make the correct choice now, NIO is here to broadcast all of their personal information. Remember, young people document every facet of their personal lives online. In about 30 minutes, we were able to compile an impressive and comprehensive profile for Elena.

We need to begin to actively identify those enrolled in scientific disciplines and isolate the students preparing for or involved in biological research. We need to get into the universities and speak to classes. This poses a minor, but not insurmountable, obstacle for many activists that have been trespassed, banned, or TROed. We need to team up with other aggressive campaigners who excel at engaging and educating. We need to implement a “good cop, bad cop” approach to keep our targets off balance and maximize our effectiveness.

Let's take this point by point.

1. By and large, students pursuing careers in research science truly want to help people, not victimize animals. Their indoctrination into the world of laboratory torture is slow, methodical, and deliberate. While they are being groomed, we are obligated to intercede and educate these young scientists with truth. As Alena admitted, “I was naive…I really just did not know about all this stuff.” And she is not unique.

We start with a recognition that the undergraduates being targeted want to help people. But in the very next sentence, we get a picture of the established researchers deliberately indoctrinating these young do-gooders to transform them into gleeful animal torturers. (There's no explanation here of how the grown-up researchers -- themselves presumably once dewy-eyed undergraduates who wanted to save humanity -- became evil.)

For the good of these young people, the extremists must intervene and "educate these young scientists with truth".

It would be one thing if this were just a matter of dueling fact-sheets. Of course, one of the things we hope we're teaching our undergraduates is how to be critical consumers of information. Among other things, we want them to recognize that the facts are not determined by who shouts the loudest.* So whatever claims the extremists -- or their professors -- make about animal research are only as good as the evidence that backs them up, and finding that evidence may require the student to do some legwork.

I'm OK with that. Moreover, I trust my students to reflect on the best information they can find, to reflect on their own values, and to make the best choices they can.

The extremists, though, want to influence those choices with more than just "the facts" as they see them:

2. Students also need to understand that making the wrong choice will result in a lifetime of grief. Aspiring scientists envision curing cancer at the Mayo Clinic. We need to impart a new vision: car bombs, 24/7 security cameras, embarrassing home demonstrations, threats, injuries, and fear. And, of course, these students need to realize that any personal risk they are willing to assume will also be visited upon their parents, children, and nearest & dearest loved ones. The time to reconsider is now.

Please note that these threats are not tied to any particular kind of animal research -- to research that causes especially high pain and distress, or to research with nonhuman primates, or to research that violates the prevailing regulations. Rather, the bombs, home demonstrations, and targeting of family members are being threatened for any involvement in animal research at all.

The extremists do not have a nuanced view. Merely existing with a view of animal research that differs from theirs is provocation enough for them.

And, they are happy to make their case with threats and intimidation -- which suggests that maybe they can't make that case on the basis of the fact.

3. Like all young adults, college students are acutely concerned with how they are perceived by their peers. They need to maintain a certain persona if they wish to continue to enjoy the acceptance of their community. This makes them infinitely more susceptible to negative and inflammatory publicity than their veteran-mutilator counterparts. When education fails, smear campaigns can be highly effective. Abusers have forfeited all rights to privacy and peace of mind and, if an abuser-to-be should fail to make the correct choice now, NIO is here to broadcast all of their personal information. Remember, young people document every facet of their personal lives online. In about 30 minutes, we were able to compile an impressive and comprehensive profile for Elena.

Who needs facts when you have cyber-bullying?

Indeed, the extremists are pretty clear in advocating "smear campaigns" that they are happy to lie to get their way, and that "abusers-to-be" (that is, anyone who doesn't already agree with the extremist position, or who hasn't decided to totally disengage) have no right to privacy or peace of mind.

Again, I suspect a reader or two in my age group may be thinking, "Well, if those whippersnappers didn't post so much information about themselves on the Facebooks and the MySpaces and the Tumblrs, they wouldn't get into this trouble, dagnabit!" But note again the willingness of the extremists to engage in smear campaigns. They don't need to find embarrassing pictures, videos, or posts, because they can make stuff up about you.

And, regardless of how much online time undergraduates spend in what I (or you) would judge "overshare" mode, I am not willing to tell them that the best way to deal with extremists is to go into actual or virtual hiding. I am not prepared to cede the public square, the marketplace of ideas, or the classroom discussion to the extremists.

Disagreement is not a crime, nor a sin.

Threatening and harassing people because they disagree with you, on the other hand, is a pretty lousy way to be part of the human community. Calling this behavior out when we see it is part of what we grown-ups ought to be doing, not just to set an example for the grown-ups-in-training, but also to do our part in creating the world those grown-ups-in-training deserve.

------
* The one obvious exception here: the fact of which side is shouting the loudest is determined by which side is shouting the loudest.

 

31 responses so far

  • Paul Browne says:

    Thanks for writing this Janet, this utterly despicable new tactic of NIO's deserves to be condemned in the strongest possible terms.

    I would ask readers of this blog to head over to http://speakingofresearch.com/2011/03/30/a-new-low-at-nio/ and add your voice to the comments in support of Alena, let her see how many good people care about her.

    Lets let Camille Marino learn the lesson that the ALF in the UK learned five years ago, that targeting students is a very, very stupid move!

  • KateClancy says:

    This is appalling. Thanks so much for sharing this, Janet, and for lending your perspective.

  • Dario Ringach says:

    Thank you Janet for bringing attention to this.

    "Threatening and harassing people because they disagree with you, on the other hand, is a pretty lousy way to be part of the human community."

    I'd say it is not just a lousy way to be part of the community, but rather close to criminal solicitation.

    http://definitions.uslegal.com/c/criminal-solicitation/

  • Glynis Jones says:

    The only victims here are the animals suffering the pain inflicted upon them by people such as the student mentioned above. I mean really, should i break down and cry because Shes been sent a few emails from people who disagree with inhumane treatment of animals??? GET REAL!!!

    • Susan says:

      What she was subjected to was both 'cyber bullying' and terroristic threats (making those is a crime). So you 'get real'.

  • Ashley says:

    This article is RETARDED. Vivisection should be abolished, we live in 2011...So called scientists need to stop destroying this earth!

  • Martin Dawson says:

    I actually love Camille Marino now, she is a great animal liberator! More power to her.

  • David Jentsch says:

    Once more, doing nothing more than being a voice of reason and civility triggers hatred and attacks. Scientific investigation continues to be an irreplaceable effort to save the planet and humanity. SCIENTISTS are the ones who identified global warming and are advocating for civil changes to reduce its impact. SCIENTISTS are the ones developing efforts for species conservation and wildlife protection. And yes, SCIENTISTS are the ones who are creating new treatments for Lupus (http://speakingofresearch.com/2011/03/24/taming-the-wolf-a-new-treatment-for-lupus/), spinal injuries (http://speakingofresearch.com/2011/03/04/transplanted-astrocytes-repair-spinal-cord-damage-in-rat/) and stroke (http://speakingofresearch.com/2011/01/28/animal-studies-point-to-clinical-trial-of-hypothermia-for-stroke-victims/).

    Despite this, scientists who engage in this life saving work being attacked by animal rights extremists, and so are people like Janet and Alena whose personal philosophy and ethics suggest to them that the use of animals in humane research is justifiable.

    Not unlike book burners and religious zealots - animal rights extremists show up on blogs far and wide to assault people for their thoughts. Speak up in support of the potential value and ethical basis of animal research? Get attacked for it.

    It seems opponents of animal research favor an Orwellian future where their own extremist views trump those of others and they are justified in meting out punishment accordingly. Of course, our best defense against this dark future in one in which rational discourse and dialogue by scientists and supporters of science persists because it provides a stark contrast to the hysterical and hateful banter of extremists like those at NIO.

  • Alena,
    As a mom and an AR activist, I'm very proud of you for originally coming forward in response to your dreams of helping society become a healthier and better place. Kudos! Not alot of biotech people come right out and say what they do to animals. And as I teach my 19 year old son, this is a very important life skill and character trait.

    As you probably read on other blogs preceding this one, the truth of seasoned vivisectors is dark and based in greed. When they comment here, they're pretending they didn't say all the crazy things away from here. So use you're obviously good heart to make decisions on what they want you to get involed in.

    Most importantly, notice how the collective of vivisectors shamelessly denies the exisistence of in vitro non animal testing research. Cutting up animals and injecting their eyes is just anyiquated, but profitable business! The past is the past. It' now time to protect weaker beings AND be a part of modern medice. The main truth they do not want you to know is that you, Alena, can do both.

    I would love to see you take your intelligence and goodness to studing ways to help al of society become better- study, invent, expand on current alternative methods.Most of your future professors are going down in history with the likes of Natzi Dr. Mengala as a disgrace to your science.

    Here's just a molecule of thought to start with- there is a ton of non animal successful, profitable researching going on. Especially in Europe. AltTox.com.

    Trust your conscience and try to see possibilities. And best of luck...I know our future will be a better place because you'll be there!

    Lisa Grossman

    • Susan says:

      You post this 'statement' all over the Web, and quite frankly my advice to you is 'get a life', cyber bullying of the young and making terroristic threats is unconscionable.

  • DuWayne says:

    Glynis -

    The problem with Camille, is that she doesn't just send nasty emails. She will personally threaten people with violence - she did so with me, and she calls on others to engage in bullying and harassment. She advocates violence and explicitly states that those who disagree with her must live in a state of fear. Not just a fear of harassment, not just property damage, but a fear of being assaulted and of your loved ones being assaulted. Her friend Steven Best advocates for more than mere physical assault - though he is careful to use very clever rhetorical devices that allow him to pretend that he isn't actually trying to convince others to ramp up the attacks, to produce human casualties. And Best's collaborator at the Animal Liberation Press Office, Jerry Vlasak, has openly and explicitly called for the murder of scientists and other "exploiters" of animals.

    Camille has explicitly stated her agreement with the use of that sort of violence.

    After what personal information about me that she could find in less than five minutes was posted to the NIO website and to several facebook pages, I received a deluge of emails - some threatening, most just chastising me for my support of scientists. I also (coincidentally I'm sure) saw a massive spike in spam - mostly porn spam - such spikes seem to happen every time I write about animal rights terrorists. I have a pretty good idea what Elena got, because I have been subjected to similar attacks (though not the creation of a fictional profile).

    Ashley -

    It is nice to see the use of a term that describes a spectrum of disabilities as a pejorative. Your exploitation of the disabled to attack others is a credit to your cause.

  • samantha says:

    Great blog post! I absolutely abhor the tactics used by groups like NIO, ELF, ALF, etc - It's as though their ideas aren't solid enough to stand on their own or something. Fancy that.

    I'm a firm believer that those that reject science, or an aspect thereof, should no longer have access to it. Don't like animal testing? You don't get the privilege of using the drugs and treatments that were tested on animals. Y'know, the safe ones. With proven efficacy. Used by doctors and scientists.

    Judging from the above posts, it looks like your blog is about to become a mini battlefield of BS comments. :/

  • larry says:

    Here is a video on animal rights: http://meat.org

  • Dan says:

    Do these people really understand how and why research is done?

    Instead of trying to understand how animal work is -currently- being done, they condemn it and just rally behind some self-justified ideal. I wish that there'll be some dialogue between the activists and the scientists, and perhaps, letting the activists train as a scientist for a few years. After learning about science in academia and research (not to be confused with some horror stories and private industries), then they can perhaps explain if they still hate science.

    They don't condemn vegans, because they eat plants and understand how and why there's a need to eat plants, being plant-eaters themselves, don't they? And if they hate eating vegetables even then, they will at least have a good understanding and are able to explain why they dislike plant-eating in a reasonable manner.

    There are much more important things they should spend their feelings of hatefulness and anger on - such as war.

  • eileen campbell says:

    To Mr Jentsch,

    This "Orwellian future" you cite has been the case for the millions of animals that are tortured and abused in laboratories all over the world. Drugged, distressed, depressed and with no hope they sit in cages waiting for humans to pull them out, strap them up, strap them down, cut them open and torture them. Then they are finally put out of their misery and killed. YOU are doing the ATTACKING.....you have to be a zealot to inflict pain, fear and despair on another living creature. We share this planet that you crow you are saving...with other living creatures...we have taken away THEIR right to life because we are more intelligent. Does it make it right?....no....it does not.

    If we were truly 'civilised' then our focus would be on saving all life, not at the expense of others. All of our energies and money would be directed at developing technology that does not require the death of another living creature. But why pay for this when you can just slice open a monkey's brain eh?

    Your "Rational discourse and dialogue" does not include a voice for animals...you have to be shouted over because you and your ilk patronise and undermine people who have concerns for the well being of animals. Incidentally for every angry animal right's protestor there is an equally angry pro animal abuser out there shouting abuse and threats...as you will be well aware.

    And for 'Samantha' who states that those who 'reject animal testing' should not receive treatment or drugs that have been tested on animals then yes I absolutely agree with you because I want to receive the treatment or the drugs that have NOT been tested on animals! I do NOT want the money that I pay in taxes to go towards paying the salary of someone that tortures animals, or the doctor that pushes the drugs that have been tested on animals.

    And as far as these "Safe drugs" are concerned....why are they tested time and time again?...when they have already been tested? Why do doctors practically write out a prescription for something before your arse hits the chair instead of speaking to you and really getting to the root of a problem? Why are doctors happy to push more drugs on us now than they have ever been? Could there be some financial gain somewhere? Could these vast pharma companies count on these doctors to keep putting money in the bank? Could this explain why animal testing is justified? and the likes of David Jentsch's salary is justified? Maybe I am just a cynic and he really is an altruistic heart of gold saviour who gives each little monkey a pat on the head before he cracks open it's skull....

  • Rune C. Olwen says:

    The use of the word "truth" and "2. Students also need to understand that making the wrong choice will result in a lifetime of grief" are a short way of expressing all what made me avoid self-appointed animal righters.
    When I was trying out eating vegetarian in the beginning of organic farming, I was quite sympathetic to the animal rights movement.
    I have been a fibromyalgia sufferer since childhood, but with the usual delay of diagnose, so I tend to see the limitations of scientific medicine.

    But what I experienced was a then-creeping and now blatant copy of religious fanatics and abortion-forbidders, more and more complete with rape ideology and other misogyny.

    Dear Alena, that´s what too many women have to experience - and I do hope, that your try to recant was just temporary (remember author Salman Rushdie´s try to call himself a Muslim again, and to apologize? It did not work, and now he knows, as do many women who were attacked for anything from having an opinion to simply exist while some bully needed a target.)

    If you need psychotherapy, this way many violence survivors react has now the name PTSS - PostTraumatic Stress Syndrome, and the sooner you get some psychotherapy, the less aftermath will be.

    But please look at all the support and do not let despicable violent individuals destroy your hopes and your career!

    Rune C. Olwen

  • Rune C. Olwen says:

    P.S.: Janet, thank you for bringing this up.

  • DuWayne says:

    Larry -

    It might interest you to know that I am absolutely appalled by the methods used by most of the meat industry and support a major reduction in meat consumption because of that and because of the resources required to raise meat. I would love nothing more, than to see the bulk of human diets come from vegetarian/vegan diets.

    I also support animal testing and many other uses of non-human animals.

  • sockpuppet says:

    Can a group of us harass animal rights extremists? I think it would be fun.

    • yep says:

      You don't need to trouble yourself, your tax-dollars pay people to do it for you.

      http://www.boingboing.net/2008/05/21/fbi-looking-for-vega.html

      Hell, even the Bush JD thought it was stupid to spend anti-terrorism resources on a social movement that has not harmed a living being and is largely guilty of petty vandalism and saying mean things about people.

      • Janet D. Stemwedel says:

        The claim that animal rights extremists have "not harmed a living being" doesn't square with the facts, either with the real psychological harm done to researchers (and their family members) who have been targeted, or with animals that have been physically harmed or even killed as the result of being "liberated" by these extremists. Plus, car bombs in fire-prone climates are tempting serious physical harm to many, many living beings.

        If we're going to count psychological harm to animals in research as a real harm to be minimized or eliminated, you can't discount the same kind of harm against humans -- at least, not without being wildly inconsistent.

  • DuWayne says:

    Eileen -

    Incidentally for every angry animal right's protestor there is an equally angry pro animal abuser out there shouting abuse and threats...as you will be well aware.

    While my involvement with this issue is somewhat more limited than others, I have spent a great deal of time on it. I certainly have been involved enough to notice the alleged abuse you are talking about, if it actually happened. You are certainly welcome to back up your assertion. The closest I have seen, has been people who have been threatened or attacked responding to those who threaten them. Even then it rarely involves outright threats, or abuse.

    Please show us these abusers on the pro animal testing side. I see a fair amount of anger, to be sure. But I think you would be pissed too, if someone blew up your car - assaulted your family - tried to firebomb your house, etc.

  • Paul says:

    Sockpuppet "Can a group of us harass animal rights extremists? I think it would be fun."

    No, because we are better than terrorists like Camille Marino and Lisa Grossman.

    Pro-Test in Oxford showed how it is possible to stand up to and defeat animal rights extremism through peaceful demonstrations and by making the scientific case for animal research, because in the end the scientific evidence is massivly in favour of animal research.

    I'm sure students in the US are as dedicated and brave as those in the UK.

  • Eleanor says:

    In no way do I think this poor student brought this on herself. She was naif, but then we should be able to discuss these things with people and present our views without being threatened or harassed. Otherwise we get no where.

    Digging up grannies and intimidating young people is no way to win an argument. Support for animal testing rose to 77% in the UK after the animal rights fringe groups' actions escalated, meaning there was no way that the more mainstream animal rights movement's concerns would be addressed.

  • Roger says:

    Things are getting very bad over here, as bad as I saw when I lived in England. Given the threats the "animal rightists" (and they are rightists, as rightist as the bullies trashing Jewish shops in times past; they are not on the political left) are making, if I worked in bioscience my first move would be to get a concealed carry permit, and my next stop would be a good gun store.

    Not to go after the rightists, but for pure self defense.

  • Teresa says:

    Camille has a way with words that expresses all of our emotions very well. But all she said essentially was: "You know, someone is going to kick your ass some day!"
    That's it. That's all.

    You know what the last 3 days reminds me of? A bunch of kindergarteners sitting in a line playing the secret game. Its starts as one thing and ends as a totally irrelivant thing. Please tell me you people have more of a life than this.

  • Lisa says:

    DARE TO COMMENT HERE!

    http://negotiationisover.com/2011/04/06/war-on-student-vivisectors-victories-helpful-insights-from-the-enemy/

    Also, please don't forget to tell everyone about our next protest at Alpha Genesis on April 16th.

    Thanks for all your help :)

    @Avicenna
    If people in this world disagree with everything else, no one can disagree with Camille’s words the time for civil discourse has expired. We are no longer going to do the same things activists did 25 years ago when animals are still experimented on. Logic or Terrorism?

    When people are really really REALLY means to you and hurt your feelings but not you, it’s just opinion and the first amendment protects that. Let’s not forget, you guys are sadists so it’s easy to see why your own activities could incite these reactions. That’s the reason virtually no law enforcement in our country would jail us let alone call us terrorists. Simply we are not. We have hurt no one and we aren’t sought as criminals. You can say that you feel as scared as you would if real terrorists talked about you, but that’s still not a crime. If I tell you- and I do here and now- that you are so evil that you’ll pay dearly for it, still not against the law. And as any law enforcement agency will tell you, it’s laughable that you think otherwise.

    You know, you didn’t every have to alert any law enforcement agencies. They have been here the whole time- hopefully taking YOUR names and numbers!
    Harassment as you define it, in your opinion, might be against the law at some point but we have never done that. You can argue and whine and tell everyone in the barnyard that the sky is falling but your words are in direct contradiction with how law enforcement treats us. Let me say that again only clearer. All US 3-letter agencies are trained and educated to protect. I don’t always love them, but you really need to humble yourself to their skills, just a little. THEY ARE NOT INTERESTED. They check in on us occasionally here but I’m kind of glad- they’ll keep us safe from you guys, LOL! You can post all over the place that there are terrorists running free threatening you guys- that is your first amendment right. But you must know at some point if people who are smarter and highly trained and specialize don’t agree with you, are you kind of acting like a fool? So what are YOU saying to these agencies that need you guys so badly to help them? That they aren’t trained and not doing their jobs, letting terrorists openly prey on US citizens? What you’re doing will work for awhile- and I commend you on your action planning skills. Especially after a bunch of you guys devised that survival plan. You definitely have them scared anyway. I cannot imagine though, no matter what more you say or write, why no one of and intelligence or importance is acting on your words and ideas. Probablly for the same reason they don’t act on ours. And that is how any idot can tell we’re not terrorists.

    Well I’m off to finish our ideas and flyers targeting the FL DEP for the Paynes Prairie animals. And targeting UF for refusing to release public records. And targeting the current congressional session on cutting funding for animal experimentation. And targeting Alpha Genesis in SC. Hey! Maybe you should call FBI agents you told about the NIO terrorists and warn them that we are coming for Alpha Genesis April 16th.

  • Virginia says:

    Has it ever occured to anyone that Camille and the rest started out going by the book in defense of animals? That time after time after time she got patronized and the situations never got better? Hence the name ... Negotiation Is Over.

    Non-animal testing exists in all shapes and forms. It's being used now. So why aren't all the researchers using them? GREED. The dirty little secret that gets keeps getting swept under the rug is that animal research is a billion +++ dollar industry. Not even including the kick-backs.

    Torturing and killing animals for the sake of the almighty dollar. That's all it is. Sick.

    I'm proud to be able to say Camille, Lisa, and the others are my friends.

  • [...] I’ve done no tip of my opinion of a animal rights movement, in sold Jerry Vlasak, a mishap surgeon who has plainly advocated a murder of researchers who use animals while–wink, wink, nudge, nudge–denying that he’s advocating anything. Another animal rights romantic who is equally inhuman is Stephen Best, who is dependent with a even some-more inhuman Camille Marino of a unpleasant Negotiation Is Over, that has recently taken to targeting for nuisance students meddlesome in biomedical investigate who have worked with animals. NIO put this devise into action, too, by targeting an hapless youth majoring in biology named Alena Rodriguez. It competence be that in doing this they overreached, yet that stays to be seen. It’s clear, however, that NIO isn’t about to stop. In fact, it’s charity a annuity of $100 to college students who rodent out their associate students to Camille’s crazies so that they can be targeted for harassment. [...]

  • […] science bloggers have joined SR in condemning their words. Janet Stemwedel (Ethics and Science Blog) ripped apart NIO’s tactics; Dr. Isis (On becoming a domestic and laboratory goddess) made a […]

Leave a Reply