Follow-Up On Bogus Watt Quote

It turns out I wasn’t the only person who was immediately suspicious of that apparently bogus quote from James Watt that Bill Moyer used in a recent speech. A Little Reason and Stark Raving Sane were also on top of this.

I just have a couple of things to add.

First, it turns out that August Miles, who is the original source for this quote attributed to Watt, is also extremely careless about attribution. Theron Mann notes,

First, Loren emails to say that he has written to Austin Miles, the earliest published source of Watt’s alleged “last tree” quote, and Miles told Loren that he personally remembered Watt making the statement on a PTL broadcast. (Miles was unable to remember the date of the broadcast). I’m still sceptical, but it’s hard to prove or disprove without Watt, Bakker or someone else coming forward.

Obviously its difficult to obtain certainty, but we have another clue about whether the quote is genuine or not. Miles claims that, Watt “is a born-again evangelical who sat on the board of directors of the scandalous PTL Club ministry while serving as our Secretary of Interior.” That also turns out to be false. Watt was added to the PTL Club board of directors in 1987, about four years after he was forced out as Secretary of the Interior.

Miles claim is especially egregious — and he owes Watt a major apology on this issue — because Watt was brought into the PTL after the scandal erupted. When it was clear the PTL was in serious trouble, James Bakker turned over the keys to Jerry Falwell who then set up a board of directors including Watt to oversee the ministry while Falwell undertook auditing the PTL which turned out to be over $60 million in debt.

Miles clearly wants the reader to think that Watt was somehow associated with the scandal itself. This is outrageous and probably libelous if Watt wanted to pursue the matter.

So Miles can’t even get publicly verifiable information right, and we’re supposed to just trust his memory of an unspecified PTL broadcast? I think not. The burden is on those claiming that the quote is accurate, and every time we turn around we see that every other part of the story is false. There is simply no reason to believe that the quote is true. Treat it as bogus until one of these jokers — Moyers, Scherer or Miles — actually does his job and provides corroboration.

The second issue which I’m certain some people must wonder is why get so damned worked up over a single misquote? Because this is typical of how bogus claims and quotes are manufactured and occasionally enter the mainstream.

Look, when you come across an outlandish quote — especially one that puts your opponents in a very bad light — its incumbent on those repeating the quote to do a bit of fact checking.

I do a lot of writing about the animal rights movement. But when I read in a book or see someone post on a newsgroup that Ingrid Newkirk made some outrageous statement that I’ve never heard before, I don’t rush off to publish it on my blog. I check and doublecheck the quote. A lot of people don’t. Newkirk has a reputation for saying outlandish things, so some people think if they see an outlandish claim attached to Newkirk’s name they can just assume she must have said it. Just as, in this case, Moyers and Scherer simply assumed that since Watt had a reputation for making outlandish statements, that they were safe in assuming this statement was also accurate without bothering to do even a minimum of fact checking.

Scherer is especially guilty in this case. I would never write an op-ed in which I repeated a quote from a single source without any sort of reference or footnote that could be checked. Scherer was reckless and stupid in simply repeating Miles claim without trying to corroborate it.

A good rule of thumb is to treat such material as if it came from someone you don’t have a very good opinion of. Would Scherer have repeated an outlandish, unsourced quote attributed to Bill Clinton in a book by Rush Limbaugh without first corroborating it? Doubtful. But because Miles’ view of religion is similar to Scherers’, he apparently just drop his critical reasoning and went with it.

Just because people agree with us, however, doesn’t mean they aren’t also full of shit.

One final thought. I had never heard of August Miles before this, but as an atheist I found the portions of his book that I read pretty much disgusting and worthless. He seemed cut in the mold of the American Atheists, wherein atheism is mistaken for open hatred of religion.

In some respects, I agreed with Scherer, but every single item he complains about religious right extremists is also present in religious and secular left wing extremists.

Belief that we are in an end times when the entire world is on the verge of a global apocalypse? The Left’s got that in spades. Their morality all over my life? Don’t even get me started about all the Lefties I know who think that Jesus’ message is all the justification they need for redistributive tax policies and, in some cases, outright socialism.

Scherer thinks he and the religious right are nothing alike. But from my vantage point, they seem all but indistinguishable — just different sides of the same pain-in-the-ass control freak mentality, warning me I have to place my life in their hands if I don’t want the world to end. And in this case, with the same exacting standards of scholarship.

In Defense of Animals Can’t Count to Two

In January, In Defense of Animals released a list of what it called the “10 Worst Zoos for Elephants.” Among those zoos listed was the Cameron Park Zoo, in Texas. IDA complained that,

Even though companionship is essential to elephants’ psychological health, this Texas zoo displays and keeps a single elephant.

In fact, the Cameron Park Zoo has had two African elephants since its elephant exhibit opened in 1993, except for a brief period in 1996 after an aging elephant died.

IDA says it got the information from the American Zoo and Aquarium Association’s database of zoo animals, but didn’t bother to call the zoos it listed as the “10 Worst” to verify that information. IDA’s Catherine Doyle told the Waco Herald-Tribune,

It wasn’t meant to be a scientific study. It was an opinion piece. . . . The most important thing is that the public be educated about issues with elephants in zoos. These animals are suffering in zoos and dying in zoos because of captivity-induced conditions.

Certainly one should never expect to receive anything scientific from IDA, just as you shouldn’t expect anything historic from the t-shirt they sell with a bogus quote from Abraham Lincoln.

Its the activism that counts — screw the accuracy.

Source:

Animal rights group wrongly harangues Cameron Park Zoo. J.B. Smith, Waco Herald-Tribune, January 11, 2005.

Karen Davis Reviews Joan Dunayer’s Speciesism

As mentioned previously, Joan Dunayer’s new book, Speciesism, has stirred up a hornet’s nest (excuse my maligning of our non-human friends for the moment) among animal rights individuals and groups because of its attack on groups like People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals and United Poultry Concerns because those groups have adopted a strategy of seeking intermediary step — such as changes in the size of cages that egg laying hens are kept in — on the way to their animal liberation fantasies. As far as Dunayer is concerned, groups like PETA and UPC are almost as bad as those who “murder” animals themselves.

UPC’s Karen Davis recently posted her review of Dunayer’s book, and the first thing to note is, as with Norm Phelps’ review, that the difference is one of tactics rather than philosophy. So, for example, Davis writes extremely favorably of Dunayer’s overall view of animal rights (emphasis added),

She [Dunayer] challenges the privileging of beings whose mental life fits the profile of a philosopher gazing in the mirror. Not only is there wealth of evidence showing that nonhuman animals, including insects, have rich and varied lives, including, in many cases, “perceptual powers that we lack”; but virtually all nonhumans are better eco-persons than we are. On the basis of reason and ethics, it makes sense, says Dunayer, to “value benign individuals more than those who, on balance cause harm. In utilitarian terms, a chicken’s life is worth more — not less — than the life of the average human, because chickens are far more benign.” But human vanity being what it is, such logic seldom prevails.

If I or David Martosko said that “Animal rights activists value animals more than human beings” we’d be accused of creating a straw man. Joan Dunayer says it, and the usual suspects fall in line to praise her.

What Davis objects to is Dunayer’s assertion that the only difference between PETA/UPC and those who slaughter animals for food is that “PETA and UPC staff won’t commit the murders themselves.”

Davis complains,

Dunayer writes: “If I were in a Nazi concentration camp and someone on the outside asked me, ‘Do you want me to work for better living conditions, more-humane deaths in the gas chamber, or the liberation of all concentration camps?’ I’d answer, ‘Liberation.’ . . . I’d regard any focus on better living conditions or more-‘humane’ deaths as immoral.”

But is the choice so patently either/or? In real prison situations, inmates are ready to sell body and soul for a stale crust of bread — anything! If I were in a concentration camp, I don’t know that I wouldn’t forego the possibility of full emancipation sometime in the future for a little cup of coffee, a reduction in the amount of lice or number of beatings, a less painful death, in the here and now. Stupid maybe, but what did the political machine bosses offer the grateful suffering multitudes in the early 20-th century New York City that the social theorists alone could not deliver? “There’s got to be in every ward somebody that any bloke can come to and get help. Help, you understand; none of your law and justice, but help.”

Source:

Book Review: Speciesism. Karen Davis, United Poultry Concerns, January 11, 2005.

Dan Berger Tries to Rewrite History

Far-left web site Infoshop has an interview with Dan Berger in which Berger tries to rewrite a little history about an animal rights conference he organized in the late 1990s.

Berger hasn’t been involved in the animal rights movement for years, apparently moving on to general left wing causes, but in 1999 he was busy organizing the Total Liberation Conference originally scheduled to be held at Florida Atlantic University. Here’s how Berger tells the tale today,

My last hurrah with animal rights came in 1999, during my senior year of high school, when I organized a conference-the first conference I went to. It was called the Total Liberation Conference, and was an attempt to bridge animal, human, and environmental liberation movements. In retrospect, it was more an “other issues 101” kind of conference for animal rights and Earth First! activists. Nevertheless, it was something quiet, conservative Boca had never seen, and it scared them. The state came down on the conference pretty hard-the university where it was scheduled cancelled a day before the conference was slated to take place. Then the cops shut down our first back-up location, effectively canceling the first night by stopping, searching, threatening and otherwise harassing activists who came to the park. The only person physically threatened was the speaker from the American Indian Movement, one of the few people of color there, who Feds threatened to shoot, and then followed until he left town. (Thankfully, he still came back the next day to speak.) It was a very intense time for me, and quite an education in the politics of repression. It was also a good lesson in organizing; despite having speakers from AIM and MOVE, the conference was almost all white. How I reached out to people and who I reached out to was very limiting. Being criticized for creating such a white conference under the name “total liberation” was a challenging but utterly important process for me.

The state brought everything to stop an animal rights conference? Not quite.

The university cancelled because Berger’s group failed to come up with the $900 fee the university would need to provide security. Why so much? Was the university trying to stick it to the activists?

Hardly. Berger’s group didn’t bother to apply to use space for the conference until just a week before the conference was scheduled to begin. Normally the university would hire off-duty police officers for security at such events, but with the last minute notice it was unable to secure enough off-duty officers and so would have had to pay its own police officers their on-duty wages for the conference.

So the group then decided to moved to a pavilion at Patch Reef Park in Boca Raton, Florida. But the Friday night before that was to happen, police showed up at the door of one of the organizers to inform them that the meeting would not be allowed to take place. Police sticking it to the activists? Again, not quite — again, the group failed to pay the $35 rental fee for the pavilion and never bothered to obtain a permit for the meeting.

How did the organizers react to their own series of incompetence? According to the Palm Beach Post,

About a dozen people from a conglomeration of activist groups picketed the Boca Raton Police Department Monday morning, spelling out “P-I-G” and chanting slogans such as “End the police state now.”

Animal rights nutcases insulting police by calling them pigs! That is simply delicious.

According to the Palm Beach Post,

Dan Berger, an Animal Defense League activist and Spanish River
High School student, skipped school Monday to picket police headquarters.

Remember kids, stay in school. Don’t let this sort of thing happen to you.

Source:

Fur flies in Boca when city, FAU block protesters. Eliot Kleinberg, Palm Beach Post, February 22, 1999.

Harrison David Burrows, Josh Demmitt Sentenced to 2 1/2 Years

Convicted animal rights terrorists Harrison David Burrows, 18, and Josh Demmitt, 19, were sentenced in January to two-and-a-half years each in prison for their in an arson at Brigham Young University.

Burrows reached a plea agreement with prosecutors in October 2004 and plead guilty to one count of felony destruction of property by fire. He faced up to five years on that charge. In return for the plea agreement, Burrows agreed to testify against Josh Demmitt whom Burrows told prosecutors was also involved in the arson.

Demmitt also decided to take a plea bargain and plead guilty in October 2004 to one county of felony destruction of property by fire as well.

Burrows and Demmitt helped set fire to an animal husbandry farm on Ellsworth Farm at Brigham Young University on July 8, 2004. The fire caused an estimated $30,000 in damage.

Source:

Second Man Sentenced for Utah Farm Fire. Associated Press, January 18, 2005.

SLC Snitch: Harrison David Burrows. No Compromise, Issue 25.

Teen gets 2 1/2 years for setting BYU eco-terror fire. Associated Press, January 11, 2005.

California Court Dismisses PETA’s “Happy Cows” Lawsuit

The last time we heard about People for the Ethical Treatment’s lawsuit against the California Milk Producer Advisory Board over that organizations “Happy Cows” advertising campaign, San Francisco Superior Court Judge David Garcia had dismissed the case. Garcia narrowly ruled that the advisory board was protected by sovereign immunity from such lawsuits.

PETA, you might remember, claims that California cows really are not happy, and that claiming they are in ads violates California’s state truth-in-advertising laws.

But PETA insisted on appealing Garcia’s ruling, and this month a Court of Appeal Panel in San Francisco agreed with Garcia, citing precedents including lawsuits dismissed against a University of California Hospital and the state’s Lottery Commission in dismissing the lawsuit.

Instead of filing a lawsuit, the court ruled that PETA has to file a complaint with the state director of Food and Agriculture who is empowered to decide whether or not to hold a hearing about the matter and whether the issue can be forwarded to a district attorney or state attorney general for prosecution.

No word yet on whether PETA will appeal the latest ruling, but don’t be surprised if they do.

Source:

Bob Egelko, San Francisco Chronicle, January 12, 2005.