There is one blindingly obvious problem with Peta
Okay, cruelty to animals in any form is probably not a good thing- but what the hell do they think animals do in nature when Humans aren't around? Sit around on tree stumps drinking tea out of tiny little cups and re-enacting Watership Down? Animals don't die of old age in their natural environments.
Technically I suppose it is pretty cruel to jam a hook in a fish's mouth, drag it out of the water and kill it. Its also pretty cruel for another fish to come along and bite it, then gradually and excruciatingly eat it alive.
Are Humans are supposed to be better than animals? There are two possibilities- either we're just another animal, in which case we're within our rights to eat from the food chain like anyone else, or we're a 'higher form' of life, in which case it would make sense that we have control over the earth and the right to make use of its resources. If that's the case, I can damn well choose to eat whatever I want.
Forget human cruelty animals, howabout animal cruelty to animals?! Pragmatically, if PETA were serious about reducing the suffering of, eg, the average adorable wild fluffy rabbit, they'd have to kill all the foxes in the world, or GM them to modify their diet. I don't think they'd want to do that, so why do they think they can modify human behaviour?
The basic idea of animal rights- that people should not go out of their way to be cruel to animals if they can help it, is a lot different to some of the crap PETA spouts.
They're a nutcase group of fringe lunatics and celebrity airheads, and they do the cause of animal rights a grave disservice.