DATE: Sunday, August 10, 1997               TAG: 9708080008

SECTION: COMMENTARY              PAGE: J4   EDITION: FINAL 

TYPE: Book Review

                                            LENGTH:  139 lines

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR - THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT

ANIMAL RIGHTS

Nazi comparisons by PETA are shameful

Your staff writer Marc Davis did an excellent job of summarizing the case of Huntingdon Life Sciences vs. Michelle Rokke and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (``PETA spy testifies she didn't know what she was taking,'' July 29, and ``Judge criticizes PETA's methods, bars group from using undercover tapes,'' July 30).

The most shocking part of his report had to do with the vicious outburst by PETA's attorney, Philip Hirschkop, and PETA co-founder Ingrid Newkirk outside the court after the judge had granted Huntingdon's request for a preliminary injunction.

Calling their opponents ``Nazis''. . . who would make lampshades out of human skin if paid to do so (Hirschkip), and accusing Huntingdon of running a ``concentration camp'' (Newkirk), is the kind of outrageous, irrational slur we've come to expect from PETA. Newkirk, after all, was quoted in a 1983 Washington Post article as saying, ``Six million Jews died in concentration camps, but 6 billion broiler chickens will die this year in slaughter houses.''

Surely her recurrent Holocaust references cannot be meant to equate the sacrifice of laboratory animals in the name of medical progress - or broiler chickens for that matter - with the ruthless murder of 6 million innocent human beings. Ms. Newkirk and Mr. Hirschkop should be ashamed of themselves.

David N. Narr

Common Sense for Virginia

Virginia Beach, Aug. 3, 1997

Stealing trade secrets wasn't PETA's aim

Judge Robert G. Doumar's decision to suppress PETA's documentation and video footage of animal abuse at Huntingdon Life Sciences laboratory (news, July 30) chalks up another for the bad guys.

Judge Doumar says that PETA investigator Michelle Rokke's evidence was gleaned ``surreptitiously and fraudulently''; that she signed a confidentiality agreement with Huntingdon and then defied it.

Just how are government-sanctioned injustices brought to the public if not for covert investigations? In this country torturing and killing animals, i.e., animal experimentation, knows no bounds.

Why didn't Judge Doumar consider the question of intent? Does anyone really believe, as Huntingdon lawyers assert, that PETA sent Rokke into the laboratory to steal trade secrets? Or was PETA's intention as it always is - to stop animal suffering?

The health of our society depends on ``whistle blowers'' and, if need be, hidden cameras to secure the evidence necessary to prosecute. Judge Doumar's ruling sends a demoralizing message of futility to future informants.

Susan Perna

Chesapeake, Aug. 3, 1997

It's time to change confidentiality law

Regarding the recent court case of Huntingdon Life Sciences vs. PETA:

Any law that protects a company's ``right'' to keep its abuse of lab animals secret needs to be changed. The confidentiality law is too rigid and does not consider special circumstances.

The American public should press for it to happen here and now. Or is it necessary to wait a few more centuries for the human race to become civilized enough to respect all life?

Ellen Hassett

Norfolk, Aug. 3, 1997

NORFOLK

Cost of Taylor School renovation needs studying

Mayor Paul Fraim has stated that ``reasonable persons can differ'' on the issue of the demolition or renovation of historic Taylor School (news, July 26). Well, if reasonable minds can differ, it seems that we should dig a little deeper before we take the irrevocable step of demolishing an important public structure at significant expense.

Why is City Council apparently unwilling to do just that? Funding a study on the cost of renovation and expansion of the existing school could save limited taxpayer dollars and provide a better school at the same time. That study was never done, and I don't see how such an important decision can be intelligently made without one.

Donna Briggs

Norfolk, July 29, 1997

EXECUTION

Maybe it's ``ciao'' time for Benito Mussolini

I continue to be puzzled by the degree of interest shown by the government and people of Italy, as well as the Vatican, over the execution of convicted rapist, torturer and murderer Joseph O'Dell (``Italy buries O'Dell, with honors,'' Aug. 1).

Even more bizarre is their near canonization of the man, extending so far as honorary citizenship of Palermo, a papal audience of condolence for his widow and a lavish gravestone inscribed, ``Honorary citizen of Palermo killed by Virginia, USA, in a merciless and brutal justice system.''

Still, one must respect the fact that it is their country and they may embrace any cause they choose, regardless of the opinion of the people of the United States.

Accordingly, I think it is only fitting that we, the people of Virginia, petition our governor and legislators to authorize the raising of a statue on Monument Avenue in Richmond honoring Benito Mussolini. The monument should show him mounted on a noble steed with the appropriate number of feet raised off the ground, and it should display the inscription, ``Honorary citizen of Richmond killed by a vengeful and bloodthirsty Italian mob in a merciless and brutal wartime frenzy.''

David A. Spriggs

Norfolk, Aug. 5, 1997

ECONOMY

While Congress plays, the taxpayers pay

Members of both parties in Congress are beating their breasts and congratulating themselves on a job well-done on the balanced budget agreement. The Democrats cry out that we have saved the environment, bolstered education and provided for the lower-wage earners. The Republicans shout that we reduced taxes on capital gains, encouraged IRA savings and slowed the growth of Medicare.

Meanwhile, neither party had the fortitude or concern to tackle the tough problems in Social Security, long-term fiscal funding of Medicare and Medicaid, corruption in campaign funding, elimination of the unconscionable corporate pork waste of tax dollars, reduction of defense spending, overhaul of the IRS, reduction of welfare entitlements (a Clinton promise) and a general reduction in the size of government.

Congress is going home for a vacation with little more than a five-year plan to balance the budget that many economists claim would balance itself in two years in this ``exuberant'' economy. As employees of the voters, are they really entitled to a vacation?

Milton K. Kaplan

Norfolk, Aug. 1, 1997

THE FLAG

Confederate symbol can't be waived

As a middle-aged, Southern-born white male, I was dismayed by the article ``Flagging Hatred'' (Commentary, Aug. 3) by Terri Williams, ``a 31-year old African-American woman.''

Before I read Ms. Williams' article, I was only mildly offended by the Confederate flag - ``The Flag,'' as she calls it. Her attempt to neutralize the flag's symbolism succeeded, for me, in making the flag more offensive.

That Ms. Williams has ``no definitive stand on just what `The Flag' symbolizes'' is sad in the extreme. The driver of the pickup with ``The Flag'' draped around the gun rack would gleefully tell her what the flag means to him and to many others.

D. F. Miller

Norfolk, Aug. 3, 1997

Send Suggestions or Comments to webmaster@scholar.lib.vt.edu