Animal Rights Leader Says 'Kill Scientists'

Trauma surgeon and prominent animal rights advocate, Jerry Vlasak, told the UK Observer that scientists and researchers should be assassinated to protect animals' lives. Specifically, he stated:

"I don't think you'd have to kill too many [researchers]. I think for five lives, 10 lives, 15 human lives, we could save a million, 2 million, 10 million non-human lives."

Dr. Vlasak has been linked to the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM), a shill organization for PETA, but even they have disavowed any affiliation with him due to his radicalism. Legal experts have warned that if he continues his call for assassinations, he may be charged with inciting violence.

Society needs to be informed about the animal rights activists. They are a cult and, as expressed by Vlasak, they are dangerously anti-human. The animal rights leadership has shown that they value the life of a rat more than a human being. Know that your contributions to PCRM and PETA are funding a cult of anti-human radicalism.

Regarding animal rights extremism, it should be noted that Ingrid Newkirk, co-founder and president of PETA, stated during an interview for New Yorker magazine that "the world would be an infinitely better place without humans in it at all." I don't think it's a coincidence that Jerry Vlasak calls for murdering people.

[Update 7/26/04, 0500] According to this story, Mr. Vlasak is claiming his words were taken out of context. Specifically,

"I am not suggesting anybody kill any other human being, but I am saying that historically violence has been used on both sides in struggles like these. If you look at other historical movements that seek to end grievous violence perpetrated on innocent victims - including fights such as that against apartheid in South Africa or against black slavery in the US - violence has always been used as an arsenal in those struggles and I do not think the animal rights liberation movement is any different. It is unfortunate, but it is true. I am not advocating the killing of anybody - any human or non-human."

The best I can figure is that he thinks violence is inevitable because people like to eat animals. And, he correlates 'animal rights liberation' to the emancipation of slaves. I personally don't see the connection. In fact, just trying to understand how Vlasak thinks gives me a headache.

Nonetheless, one thing about Vlasak seems to be quite clear. He is perfectly comfortable with and expects the animal rights movement to use violence to achieve its goals in society.