Skip to Main Content

Talking to bin Laden

Written by PETA | February 6, 2008

Well, Rudy Giuliani’s office hung up on us when we offered the once presidential hopeful an ambassadorship last week, but Omar Osama Bin Laden (the estranged son of the more notorious OBL) and his wife are talking to us. We sent a letter yesterday urging the bin Ladens to cancel plans to organize a “grueling” endurance horse race across the Sahara Desert as “a way to promote peace.” That’s a 3,000-mile horse race across North Africa, scheduled to begin in March. We didn’t think that sounded like a barrel of laughs for the horses. As PETA’s president puts it, “If this were a rally in which cars were in danger of overheating and breaking down, I’d be all for it. But horses are flesh and blood. Such a grueling race will mean fatalities, not peace. Animals have not declared war on us – they should be truly left in peace.”

The bin Ladens got back right away and some important assurances have already been given. More on this later. You can read our letter to bin Laden here.

Letter_to_bin_Laden.jpg

Related Posts

Respond

Comments

Post a Comment

If your comment doesn't appear right away, please be patient as it may take some time to publish or may require moderation.

By submitting this form, you are agreeing to our collection, storage, use, and disclosure of your personal info in accordance with our privacy policy as well as to receiving e-mails from us.

  • isabella says:

    How sad that some people still don’t seem to understand that animals are not meant to be at our disposal for whatever reason

  • Siddharth Mehrotra says:

    Everyone Cool it! For what are weblogs for arguing valid points for debating pros and cons for suggesting alternatives or for as you are doing venting irrational feelings? We aren’t here to snipe at each other until the sky falls on our heads but to discuss matters at hand. It achieves nothing to help either horses or humans to call each other’s opinions “delusions” a very insulting word drag tangent matters like the ancestry of a race’s sponsor into the conversation suggest that another writer suffers from “paranoia” dismiss possibility of peace scoff at each other’s statements use emotionally provocative terms like “unnecessary death” ignore punctuation spelling and grammar deny another’s rights to place its opinions on this list misinterpret each other’s statements without bothering to analyze them use dirty words out of context at that imply that another participant in the discussion is subject to psychotropic drugs and in short attack the speaker rather than the idea suggested. Quite the contrary. We might carry this on in a less personal way. Calling another person’s ideas “balderdash” or saying “that seems illogical to me” and adding the reason for which it does would be less offensive than saying that the person itself is delusional or callous because in the former case we are challenging the idea not insulting its originator. There’s a difference. In some cases it is conventional to challenge another person by insulting it because in that case I am challenging the other to avenge the insult or else be thought a coward. However weblogs are not for avenging one’s wounded pride but for if I’m right discussing a controversial topic. This one at least would seem to be so yet by insulting slandering and traducing each other’s moral fibers we do nothing to abet that purpose. If some of us fail to understand how horse races will aid the cause of peace I admit that this premise is illdefined let them ask the explanation of others who do understand rather than insulting what may be a strong zeal or devotion. Suggestions that some of us do this that and the other with ourselves are of no help but serve only to be sarcastic in disagreement. What we need to do is get back onto topic. Omar bin Laden has suggested a horse race as a way to promote peace those are almost his exact words now let me ask how this is expected to work. If any of you have a wellthoughtout honest logical reason show it. I may not see it but others will and they may contribute to the discussion. If you dislike the method for its venue or its fashion suggest alternatives. We need not accuse anyone of profiting from agony we need only point out that North Africa may be ground contradictory to the race and indicate the deficiencies in horse care doing so without outright accusation or preconceived judgments if possible. If the race seems ineffective or illplanned what would be better? What would be better for a horse race? What would be better for a peacemaking gesture? Consider these questions well. No argument can be successful without appeal to its audience.

  • Anita says:

    I think a lot of people on here cant see the wood for the trees! How is racing horses in such terrible conditions etc going to promote World peacenothing will!If acts to bring peace worked then there would have been peace after John and Yokos time in bed to promote peace they did it peacefully though We are talking chocolate fireguard stuff here!! There will NEVER be peaceif people dont care about killing and making animals suffer then they do not care for anythinganybody.

  • Travis says:

    To Vicky regarding not being able to bring peace through suffering See WWII And just throw it out there maybe horses are like people and they enjoy this type of thing?

  • Judith, Freedom Fighter for Animals says:

    There is nothing peaceful about running a horse into the ground and to his or her death. It’s horrific. But if we can talk to these people and make them understand this then I’m all for it. People must talk to people. And help them to understand that animals should not be ours to torture. This is a great letter. Great job PETA.

  • Lisa says:

    When I first heard about this act of using a horse for a 3000 mile run I was mad. Thank you for contacting them. There are other ways to promote peace perhaps he can have his father ride him on his back.