tagged w/ Animal Liberation
-
Part 2
-
-
gooma2
-
added this
-
9 months ago
- |
-
A new undercover investigation inside a Land O'Lakes supplier facility in Pennsylvania has revealed routine neglect and cruelty to cows who are milked for the Fortune 250 company's products. Over the course of several months, the investigation documented deplorable, filthy conditions for cows on the farm, such as pens that were filled with deep excrement (see video and photos), and cows who suffered from ailments and conditions so severe that they collapsed and became "downers" but were not put out of their misery or given veterinary care in a timely manner, if at all.
Land O'Lakes "inspected" the farm as recently as June 2009 and even noted that there were areas in need of cleaning (including the milking parlor walls!) but approved the facility nonetheless.
Cows on dairy factory farms are not given much more than the numbered tag that is punched through their ears to identify them. Read more about what happened to a few of the cows who lived and died miserably at one such farm.
The farm's owner and one of his sons were caught on video electro-shocking cows who were in too much pain to stand up. One of the farmer's sons kicked a cow and jabbed her with the blade of a pocket knife. Both the father and son have now been charged with cruelty to animals.
The dairy industry's standard forms of cruelty also led to suffering for these cows. In order to make milking easier, cows' tails were amputated by tightly binding them with elastic bands, causing the skin and tissue to slowly die and slough off and leaving the animals unable to swat away flies, which, in addition to tormenting the cows, also led to the spread of disease. Tail-docking is unnecessary and cruel, which is why it has been condemned by the American Veterinary Medical Association.
Dairy farmers don’t allow cows―whose pregnancies last for nine months, just like human pregnancies―to spend any significant time with their calves, who are taken from their mothers shortly after birth. Cows are intelligent animals who can remember things for a long time, and they have the capacity to worry about the future.
PETA's investigation also reveals cows and calves who were kept in pens and barns whose floors were covered with deep excrement, which caused foot and hoof problems and fostered the spread of disease. Calves rescued from the farm had pneumonia, "manure scald," ringworm, pinkeye, and parasites. Some cows suffered respiratory distress and had pus-filled nasal discharge streaming down their faces. Abscesses were common on the farm—some of them burst and oozed pus, even as cows were being milked, as can be seen in our video.
World-renowned meat and dairy industry expert Dr. Temple Grandin, after reviewing the footage, said, "The conditions are absolutely atrocious. ... It was obvious that the place was seldom cleaned and ... that many sick animals were not receiving veterinary treatment. ... The dairy manager totally NEGLECTED his animals. ... Many animals suffer greatly."
PETA is calling on Land O'Lakes to implement and enforce a 12-point animal welfare plan to govern all cooperative members' dairy-farming operations, which will eliminate some of the worst abuses to cows raised for their milk. Write to Land O'Lakes President Christopher Policinski now and urge him to implement the plan today. Of course, the best way for you to help prevent cows from suffering these abuses is to go vegan and stop consuming dairy products. Explore our "Vegetarian Starter Kit" for recipes and tips to get started today.A new undercover investigation inside a Land O'Lakes supplier facility in Pennsylvania... more
-
-
[go to full link for the images and links because they won't be posted here]
One thing I hear from the anti-animal liberation movement (or those apathetic to it) is that the animal liberation movement is different from other movements because the animals don't come together to rise up against their exploiters. They also claim that the animal liberation movement is unlike that of other human animal struggles because x% of that struggle was the oppressed group (i.e. 50% of the population was women during the suffrage movement). Both of these misconceptions result from both speciesism and an effective campaign to demonize any retaliation from other animals against their captors.
A recent story inspired my entry on this topic: Russian Circus Bear Kills Manager
In short, a bear exploited, demeaned, and undoubtedly beaten into performing for humans on ice skates retaliated against his/her captors. The bear was shot on scene after giving fatal injuries to their exploiter.
In reading this story, others immediately came to mind. The horrid circus elephant attempt at escape in Honalulu. She made it out of the building, and through the gates, but then where was she to escape to? She was shot to death shortly after.
When performing monkeys banded together to attack their trainer in China, who had be imprisoning and beating them, their attack ended there. They were tied to the trainer by their necks and had nowhere to escape to. No one helped them.
When a mother cow attacked a farmer as he tried to steal her baby (as farmers do), she is labeled as "overprotective" as if there was something strange about her attempts to save her child. This cow was lucky enough not to be identified by the remaining farmers, but only at the cost of killing her captor and devastating his family.
These stories and many others beg the question: How are the animals to rise up against their exploiters (without our help) when every time they do they are met with weapons and immediate punishments of death? We do not speak their language nor they ours so no amount pleading will help (which they do do in their own forms of communication as they cry out from cages, scream in pain, and other noises which are ignored by their exploiters). Letter-writing and pleading doesn't even help us get things done within our own species.
The other point about x-amount of beings being part of a struggle begs the question: Why do only humans count in the percentage? The animals in the movement, while lacking in our weapons and technology, outnumber us. For this reason, their movement should be considered on level with our own as we are all animals. Also, in most other movements, it was NOT the oppressed group acting alone against the oppressor. The oppressed group almost always had allies from outside their demographic which helped make their revolutions a success. Could those suffering in the Holocaust have brought the Nazi war machine down on their own?
Before we judge the plight and worth of other species based on their ability to revolt, we must remember that the cruelty towards our fellow animals is so heinous that it can be compared to every single human struggle that has existed. Factory farms are concentration camps. Female farm animals serve as sex slaves and breeding machines. Animals in entertainment are slaves to their oppressors.
No one is free while others are oppressed.[go to full link for the images and links because they won't be posted here]
One... more
-
-
The Center for Constitutional Rights has a great new legal guide for activists called “If An Agent Knocks.”
From CCR:
Federal law enforcement agencies like the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) have a dark history of targeting radical and progressive movements. Some of the dirty tricks they use against these movements include: the infiltration of organizations to discredit and disrupt their operations; campaigns of misinformation and false stories in the media; forgery of correspondence; fabrication of evidence; and the use of grand jury subpoenas to intimidate activists. Today’s activist must know and understand the threat posed by federal law enforcement agents and their tactics as well as several key security practices that offer the best protection.
Federal agents have many tools at their disposal to target activists. While it is important to know and understand these tools and tactics, it is of critical importance that you resist any paranoia of government surveillance or fear of infiltration, which will only serve to paralyze you or your organization in your quest for social change. If fear of government repression prevents you from organizing, the agents of repression will have won without even trying.
I think it is worth noting that in the recent appellate ruling in the SHAC 7 case, the court argued that educational materials on the SHAC website were relevant to the “terrorism” charges against them. Specifically, the court noted that the SHAC website had “a series of links dedicated to educating activists on how to evade investigators. These links were entitled, ‘Ears and Eyes Everywhere,’ ‘Dealing with Interrogation,’ ‘When an Agent Knocks,’ and ‘Illegal Activity.’”
Clearly, knowing your rights is perceived as a dangerous, dangerous thing. So get to it.
Thanks to Matthew for the link, and the excellent work on this publication.The Center for Constitutional Rights has a great new legal guide for activists called... more
-
-
The conviction of the SHAC 7–animal rights activists hit with “terrorism” charges for publishing a website and vocally, unapologetically supporting direct action–has been upheld by a U.S. appellate court. It is a landmark free speech ruling that lowers the threshold of what types of conduct are protected by the First Amendment, and upholds a law that is so broad that it targets civil disobedience as “terrorism.”
As a brief introduction: The “SHAC 7” of Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty ran an effective campaign that had the sole purpose of putting Huntingdon Life Sciences, a notorious animal testing company, out of business. The campaign pressured corporations to sever ties with the lab. The SHAC 7 were never accused of breaking windows or releasing animals from labs, but they supported those who did. They published a website which posted news of both legal and illegal tactics, and supported all of it. The website had also posted names and addresses of individuals connected to the corporations targeted.
The ruling was issued today and, although there are many aspects that deserve attention, I want to walk through what I think are by far the most dangerous and troubling implications of this ruling–those related to the First Amendment:
[PDF of the SHAC appeal ruling]
Supporting and facilitating non-violent civil disobedience is not protected speech.
As part of their campaign, SHAC supporters were emailed about “electronic civil disobedience.” The email and message board posts included instructions on how electronically “sit in” on corporate web sites through emails, faxes and phone calls.
Now, one of the benchmarks in First Amendment law is what is called the Brandenburg standard. It holds that even the most controversial and inflammatory speech is protected as long as it not likely to incite “imminent and lawless action.” That is a very high threshold. In this court ruling—which, to the best of my knowledge and the attorneys I have spoken with is the first of its kind—the written word can be construed as promoting, or resulting in, imminent and lawless action.
To put it more plainly: Vocally supporting civil disobedience, explaining what it involves, and encouraging/facilitating people to take part is not protected speech.
This is so important let me say it again, another way: People who write about civil disobedience and encourage people to take part can be found convicted of a crime even if they do not take part in the civil disobedience.
This has dangerous implications far beyond this case. For instance, I wrote about the recent call by mainstream environmental groups for massive non-violent civil disobedience in defense of the environment. Under this reasoning, organizers of that event who published a website aren’t protected by the First Amendment.
[UPDATE: One person had this question, so others might as well: I am not at all saying that simply endorsing civil disobedience is now not protected speech. However, doing so and also facilitating civil disobedience is what the court ruled is not protected. So in the example above, the organizers promoted civil disobedience, encouraged it, set up a website telling people where to go and when, and there were people involved to specifically support those arrested. I think there is a very real danger of that type of conduct being affected by the reasoning presented in this ruling. That is what I had meant by the headline and preceding points.]
Fiery rhetoric is a “true threat” when illegal conduct has taken place in the same campaign.
Another measurement of whether speech is protected by the First Amendment is whether it is a true threat. Throughout the appellate court ruling, the court argued that SHAC’s speech did, in fact, constitute a true threat.... full article at link........The conviction of the SHAC 7–animal rights activists hit with “terrorism”... more
-
-
The following is a letter just released by one of the lawyers defending the AETA 4, Bob Bloom. The letter captures both the absurdity of the charges, and the significance of the case for the animals and all of us. For a blunt and succinct explanation of how far the FBI is willing to go to crush the more effective tactics employed by the animal liberation movement, read on.
-Peter Young
A new client of mine, a young man named Joseph Buddenberg, is one of four principled, dedicated, and non-violent animal rights activists who have been indicted in federal court in San Jose, California under a new federal statute that was intended by Congress to target unlawful and violent conduct.
The statute, effective as of 2008, is known as the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (AETA), and each of the four defendants is facing five years or more in federal prison because they are alleged to have engaged in, literally, picketing at the homes of researchers they believe cause laboratory animals to be subjected to inhumane experimentation that causes suffering, pain, and death.
Congress was cautioned that the statute would be subject to overreaching by the FBI and by prosecutors. Predictably, this case that targets non-violent and non-criminal speech is the very first prosecution the government has chosen to initiate under this new statute. (The statute can be found by Googling 18 U.S.C. 43).
I do not understate or attempt to mis-state the allegations against the defendants. One of the documents I enclose is an affidavit sworn to by the FBI agent in charge of this case. The affidavit sets forth the worst of what the FBI claims the defendants did (in fact, the affidavit mis-states the facts as to one event). As you will see from reading the affidavit, the defendants are accused of identifying and locating animal researchers and then loudly picketing on the sidewalks in front of their homes. The intent was, and is, to stop the torture and other mistreatment of animals by speaking out in a non-violent manner to shame the researchers by exposing them and their conduct to their neighbors.
This kind of activity, speaking out to expose wrongdoers, is the very essence of the First Amendment. But the offending research laboratory, the University of California, is politically very powerful, and it has apparently lobbied federal law enforcement officials to bring this prosecution. The right of non-violent activists working to protect animals is under threat, and the First Amendment rights of all of us are threatened by this prosecution as well, as the animals suffer and die painful deaths every day.
The defendants are all good people, and courageous people. I have come to know Joe, and I can tell you that he cares deeply about protecting innocent creatures and putting an end to the mistreatment and the suffering. He is not a violent person, and he is not a criminal. And he certainly is not a terrorist.
Many animal lovers and civil libertarians believe that this is an extremely important case for a number of reasons. I have been engaged in civil rights law for more than forty years, and I am truly offended by, and worried by, this prosecution. Needless to say, it impacts the four defendants, but it also imperils the rights of all of us, as well as the lab animals who are being subjected to horrific mistreatment.
The case is complex and labor-intensive. It involves a maze of legal questions regarding the constitutionality of the statute, the validity of search warrants, potential issues regarding wiretapping, and other challenging issues, including the intricacies of the law of conspiracy (one of the two counts in the indictment). The facts of the case are also complicated, encompassing some fourteen incidents in at least three counties, and there are literally dozens of witnesses for whom we must prepare............The following is a letter just released by one of the lawyers defending the AETA 4,... more
-
-
BOSTON, Sept. 9 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- A recent study documents the severe emotional trauma chimpanzees suffer as a result of laboratory use and confinement. Developmental Context Effects on Bicultural Post-Trauma Self Repair in Chimpanzees was published in the September issue, Vol. 45 (5), of the American Psychological Association journal Developmental Psychology.
(Photo: http://www.newscom.com/cgi-bin/prnh/20090909/DC72238)
Psychologists G.A. Bradshaw, Ph.D., Ph.D., Theodora Capaldo, Ed.D., Lorin Lindner, Ph.D., and Gloria Grow, Fauna sanctuary director, examined the case histories of three chimpanzees -- Billy Jo, Tom, and Regis -- all used in research before rescue into sanctuary. The study underscores the ethical implications of cross-fostering nonhuman primates and their use in research.
Says Dr. Capaldo, president of the New England Anti-Vivisection Society (NEAVS): "A federal bill to end the use of chimpanzees in research (the Great Ape Protection Act, H.R. 1326) has been introduced. Studies like ours expose the reality of what it is like for approximately 1000 chimpanzees languishing in U.S. labs. Chimpanzee research must stop if we are to end the suffering caused by decisions -- both scientifically flawed and ethically unjustifiable -- to use them as living test tubes."
Billy Jo lived like a human child from infancy to his teenage years when he was sent to a lab. He spent his next fourteen years alone in a 5'X5'X7' cage, enduring hundreds of procedures. He was rescued into sanctuary at age 29 and died only 8 years later.
Tom's family was killed in Africa in order to capture him. He spent decades in three different labs undergoing multiple procedures including 369 "knockdowns" -- anesthesia by dart gun. Every morning, Tom gags uncontrollably -- the result of repeated intubations.
Regis, born in a lab, was only 2 years old when he was treated for his first stress-related injury -- he had chewed his finger nail completely off. Regis, fearful if left alone, suffers severe anxiety attacks in which he nearly stops breathing.
The chimpanzees' symptoms are consistent with traumatic stress, depression, and other psychological conditions. Post-Trauma Self Repair in Chimpanzees follows Building an Inner Sanctuary: Complex PTSD in Chimpanzees (published April 2008 in the Journal of Trauma and Dissociation), which represented the first time human psychiatric symptoms and diagnoses were applied to chimpanzees, demonstrating that psychological suffering crosses species lines. Together, the papers provide irrefutable arguments to the growing ethical imperative to end the use of chimpanzees in U.S. research.
SOURCE New England Anti-Vivisection SocietyBOSTON, Sept. 9 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- A recent study documents the severe... more
-
-
Posted by thomaspainescorner on September 5, 2009
By Kostas Alexiou, the Greek anti-speciesist
9/4/09
Here’s to the crazy ones. The misfits. The rebels. The troublemakers. The round pegs in the square holes. The ones who see things differently. They’re not fond of rules, and they have no respect for the status quo. You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them. About the only thing you can’t do is ignore them because they change things. They push the human race forward. And while some may see them as crazy, we see genius. Because the people who are crazy enough to think they can change the world are the ones who do.
—Jack Kerouac (SPEAK demo – Oct 2006)
So here we are, waiting for the debate between Steve Best and Gary Francione. But the real problem with Francione and everyone who opposes violence or disagrees with Dr. Best’s defense of effective militant direct action is not just about their ideas on animal rights or animal liberation or neo-abolitionism; it’s about their idea of Freedom and the struggle to see it realized. Arguing that violence for animal causes is unjustified is like saying that all the illegal violent animal liberators are evil and should go to jail. In these times of the Patriot Act and the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act, in these times when corporate-state oppression is expanding globally, in these times when the liberation of a cow/pig/dog/chicken from a concentration camp is considered terrorism and the liberator subject to criminal penalties, whoever does not stand proudly to support this so called “terrorism” is against Freedom and is the enemy of the animal liberation movement. State repression is increasingly harsh, which requires fierce resistance.
So here are the questions: What do Francione’s pacifists believe about ALF prisoners? Are they guilty? What do they think about animal liberators and property destroyers? Should they be in prison? Are they a threat to society?
ALF prisoners are people inside the movement who went one step further (and got caught), risking their lives and freedom just to take the cause of Animal Liberation a step further. It is a duty to those who are a part of this movement to stand proudly on behalf of nonhuman animal liberators. Now more than ever, silence is complicity and everyone who is not clearly supporting violent direct action supports the state’s terrorist oppression.
What do all the peace promoters think about the Warsaw Ghetto? Or about the American Civil War for the liberation of slaves? Or about the struggle to break the back of Apartheid? What would the peace fetishists do if their family members were tortured, mutilated and tragically killed, just because someone considered them commodities? Would they try to educate the murderers? Well, all the imprisoned nonhuman animals ARE our brothers and sisters, and it’s our responsibility to free them by any means necessary, or at least to support those who do. If people argue that violence on behalf of people is justified but that violence on behalf of nonhuman animals is taboo, they are speciesists.
It is illegal to do a peaceful demo outside the house of a vivisectionist puppy killer. Philosophers are considered dangerous to the public and are banned from entering countries for lectures. There are animal liberation advocates imprisoned for just running a web site for fucks sake! It is clear that the global corporate state complex recognizes that its interests are threatened and that it is not willing negotiate on its “right” to exploit nonhuman animals to attain its bloody lucre.
So why are Francione and his dogmatic pacifist followers unwilling to accept that underground militant direct action is advancing the cause of animal liberation? If vegan outreach alone was effective, it would have been proclaimed illegal a long time ago. It seems that the Austrian 10 example wasn’t understood at all. Animal liberation is not only about going illegal...
full article at link! Read it all!Posted by thomaspainescorner on September 5, 2009
By Kostas Alexiou, the Greek... more
-
-
The title of this post is a reference to the recent post at Womanist Musing. The post details her feelings about the ways animals have been used by a white supremacist society to metaphorize people of color. From the Black apes to the Latino chihuahuas and everything else in between. I know those feelings all to well. The post ended with a powerful few lines:
"They may scream biology until the end of time but we remember when such comparisons were used to justify slavery, rape, and segregation. For as long as my skin is Black I will be a devoted speciesist. My dignity and humanity demand no less."
Her words are haunting and powerful for me. And She’s right. Those memories run deep. People of color still get their babies snatched away, still are shot and hunted, and until (maybe) recently experimented on. People of color are treated like animals, are called animals, and are dehumanized all the time.
In the US (and the world) Blackness positions people at the bottom of a very real racial hierarchy. Solidarity between different people of color is sometimes hard as we all scramble to get ourselves away from the bottom. Some of us do this by distancing ourselves from the bottom, from Blackness. I have heard people of color who aren’t Black distance themselves by how different they are from Black people. Black people distance ourselves from each other through colorism and regionalism/xenophobia. I’ve heard American Black folks distance themselves from African Black folks through primitivist, xenophobic rants. And Black Africans distancing themselves because Black Americans are portrayed as violent and animalistic.
I can’t ask a cow about her feelings on her systematic and mechanical rape, separation from her child, and eventual slaughter. But to assume because of differences between us that she doesn’t care, or is incapable of care uses the same logic as white supremacy has used for people of color.
Koko, the famous gorilla, could sign 6,000 signs. She could create new words by combining signs. She scored between 70 and 95 on IQ tests. She makes me think of Red Peter. Red Peter is the only Kafka character to have really, truly touched me. A Report to An Academy resonates with my diasporic identity. To be snatched from home, shipped to somewhere else, and lose one’s connection to home, but to be able to speak back to the one who took you in their own tongue. Is it such a stretch to think that animals could not also be upset by being shipped in cages across oceans but be unable to tell us such in a language we can understand.
Red Peter was a link for me. He is literally a gorilla, metaphorically a diasporic person. He’s the missing link between Koko and animal and me a human. If I can empathize with a literary gorilla who tells the same story as Koko might tell, than I can also empathize with Koko, and by extension all animals.
In my soul I know it would be just as wrong for me to withdraw my solidarity to those who are seen as less than me, because of a species barrier. To construct the worth of a being by their humanness is an embrace of a world where white patriarchy is the standard. Humanness is so connected to able-bodiedness, whiteness, maleness, cisness, straightness, because these were the people who got to decide who got to count, and when they got to count as human.
For me to use biology to explain why it isn’t ok to kill or cage me, but it is to kill or cage someone else is a replication of power dynamics. It is shitting on those lower than me on a hierarchy of power, so that I can keep my perch away from the bottom.
For me to refuse compassion to other beings, simply because I have been compared to them, is to center whiteness. I say “Fuck you!” to those white folks who think they have the authority to use my history to humanize animals. But when it is just me and the caged bird I know what’s up, I don’t need to compare. My histories let me empathize in a way I doubt those in the center ever could......The title of this post is a reference to the recent post at Womanist Musing. The post... more
-
-
In a recent comment thread here at Change.org, site member and animal advocate Gary Loewenthal responded to a version of the sentiment expressed in the title of this post, some varieties of which argue that animal advocates are all urbanites with not a clue about rural farming culture or that animal advocates really know nothing about farmed animals in general or that they have no concept of what really goes on in animal ag. With permission, I share Gary's thoughtful response to some aspects of this argument below.
But before I do, I will also say (as I have before, I know) that this kind of dismissal from proponents and defenders of animal ag also ignores that some of the animal rights movement's most compelling and passionate advocates are and have been former farmers (small- and large-scale alike), former hunters, former slaughterhouse workers; many others of us are originally from farming communities or families. The undercover investigators who see, time and time again, what "really" happens on farms would also disagree that they don't know what they're talking about. And then, finally, there are these excellent points from Gary (who is too humble about his knowledge of animal issues; I am consistently impressed by his knowledge and ability to articulate it thoughtfully):
-----
Many animal advocates, such as me, volunteer at farmed animal sanctuaries. At those wonderful places (which I recommend everyone visit), I submit that we are able to see animals in ways that farmers virtually never experience.
A) We never look at the animals in terms of what they can produce, or as disposable business assets. I think that way of looking at individuals blocks your ability to truly appreciate their uniqueness, their moods, and their nuances. We see the sanctuary animals as unique individuals, sometimes as friends, and to varying degrees we sense and share in their joy and sadness.
B) We see and get to know animals who, for all practical purposes, don't exist on farms: geriatric animals, blind calves, lame turkeys, hens with terminal ovarian cancer (caused in part by being engineered to lay so many eggs).
C) We experience aspects of the animals that are unlikely to be seen on farms. We witness the formation and endurance of long-term friendships between animals. We see the resilience and recovery of animals who were lucky enough to escape slaughter at the last moment.
To be an animal advocate practically requires that you gain some expertise in animal agriculture, cooking, nutrition, and other disciplines because you are asked about those things week after week, year after year.
Like many other animal advocates, I've done considerable research to maintain credibility when doing outreach and to give informed answers and opinions. I've talked to farmers and ex-farmers, ex-slaughterhouse workers, ex-USDA slaughterhouse inspectors, ex-animal lab inspectors, current USDA and animal lab employees, people who rescue hens from battery cages, circus employees, breeders, egg producers, vegan dieticians and chefs, and a host of other people involved in animal-related pursuits. I've also read quite a bit on the history of animal agriculture, the food industry, nutrition, animal cognition, and other topics. (I also live with a rabbit who is similar to those used by the fur, meat, and vivisection industries.)
I don't mention this to toot my own horn. In a room of animal activists, this sort of continuing education is very common. Many activists know far more than I do; they put me to shame. The public is deeply vested in eating meat, dairy, and eggs. The average person, IMHO, is afraid of dropping those items from his or her diet. People get very defensive about their meat-eating in particular. Very often, they're looking for ways to dismiss our views, or to deem us uncredible, as a superficial excuse to continue their habits. So we find out very quickly that we have to be prepared, knowledgeable, and credible in order to have any impact.In a recent comment thread here at Change.org, site member and animal advocate Gary... more
-
-
Nothing in the world of animal cruelty tends to surprise me these days. However, once in a while, something comes along that sickens and disturbs me at a level that can only be described as indescribable. This is one of those days: Pain-free animals could take suffering out of farming ( http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20327243.400-painfree-animals-could-take-suffering-out-of-farming.html )
This article basically proposes that, rather than eliminate (or at least reduce) meat consumption, stop nonhuman animal testing, and stop genetic engineering and its massive negative effects on animals and the environment, that we should instead genetically engineer animals not to feel pain so that factory farming (which makes up 99% of animal product production) may continue.
Wait, it gets worse...
The neuroscientists proposing such measures did their work using animals they created various forms of brain damage in (by way of lesions, surgeries, or genetic engineering) and then placed them in electrical shock chambers to see which ones could tolerate the shocks the longest or the most frequently. Countless animals suffer in these painful and cruel experiments every day for these kinds of ideas. The researchers then speak of how it would not be economic to give cows brain surgery in mass amounts, so they must find a way to engineer them to have brain damage that will reduce their ability to feel pain.
Basically, rather than encourage a vegan diet, or at least one with less animal products, which would solve the animal factory farming problem, they want to engineer animals without certain abilities to feel pain, ignore the fact that suffering is based on far more than physical pain, and create animals who would make their consumers feel less guilty about consuming them, because they would be genetically engineered to "suffer" less.
These scientists and theorists completely ignore a few very important factors. Let us ignore the ethical and environmental problems with genetic engineering, simply because they would take far too long to discuss and because I believe it is popular to be against genetic engineering. Instead, let's examine the psychological factors involved in this.
1. Animal suffering is not caused by physical pain alone. If a female cow experienced no physical pain while being placed on a "rape rack", repeatedly impregnated by farmers, only to have her babies taken from her to be made into veal, while she was hooked up to machines, she would still suffer greatly.
2. The brain is full of connections. To eliminate one part of the brain's functioning is impossible without also affecting most if not all of the rest of the functioning in the brain. There is no feasible way to remove the "pain areas" of the brain alone without causing deficits elsewhere.
3. Pain is a necessary part of functioning and survival for all animals. Pain teaches us when we are hurt, when we need to reposition ourselves, when we have something wrong with us, and so on. Removing physical pain from an animal would likely cause MORE suffering than allowing an animal to feel pain as the animal could and would likely suffer multiple problems and injuries which s/he could not identify as well as suffer other cognitive deficits in areas that are closely connected to areas of the brain which respond to pain.
To do something so insane to these animals who are already suffering the imprisonment, exploitation, objectification, and commodification of farming simply for human over consumption, would also involve massive amounts of nonhuman animal testing involving a lot of pain. This proposal can be seen as nothing more than a fraud and a money-making scheme in which those who seek to profit from animal exploitation may continue on, and increase their activity, while confusing the public into believing that they are actually helping animals.Nothing in the world of animal cruelty tends to surprise me these days. However, once... more
-
-
Upon posting the undercover egg investigation here (http://current.com/items/90838620_undercover-egg-industry-investigation-shows-chicks-ground-up-alive.htm) on current, I found that many were outraged, some did not consume eggs and others vowed to stop. But, some claimed that they bought "free range" eggs and that this was humane. I decided to post this video as a testament to the fact that no animal farming is humane.
For more information on the myth of humane animal farming and commodification, you can visit http://www.humanemyth.org which is run by former farmers who have seen the realities of all farming- factory, family, and everything in between.Upon posting the undercover egg investigation here... more
-
-
If you are already vegan, you do not need to watch this as it is horrible. If you still consume eggs, please watch the video above. -AL
Update: to those of you claiming that "free range" solves the problem, please go here: http://current.com/items/90840728_the-free-range-myth.htm
_________________
...
Today, you can see clearly for yourself what happens at the hatcheries, how and where large egg farms and backyard operations alike get the female chicks they will use as egg-laying hens -- and what happens to the other half of the hatched chicks, who are unfortunate enough to be male and of no economic value to the industry (because they have not been bred to grow fast enough for the flesh industry). Mercy for Animals has just released the following video obtained during an undercover investigation at the world's largest hatchery for egg-laying operations: "Thrown, dropped, mutilated, and ground-up alive. This is the shocking reality faced by hundreds of thousands of chicks each day at the world's largest egg-laying breed hatchery."
Please watch. And please remember -- this is not an investigation revealing unusual cruelties. These are the standard, accepted, long-known-about, and defended practices across the egg industry. Read and see more from the undercover investigation on MFA's site dedicated to it. Now is the time to kick the egg habit.
Image and video courtesy of Mercy for AnimalsIf you are already vegan, you do not need to watch this as it is horrible. If you... more
-
-
The National Lawyers Guild has created a great new resource, “Operation Backfire: a Survival Guide for Environmental and Animal Rights Activists.” It’s a booklet on how environmental and animal rights activists have been targeted by the government and branded as the top domestic terrorism threat. It also has a great “know your rights” section that offers information on:
* handling encounters with the police and FBI in various situations
* suggestions for how to respond when questioned or presented with a warrant
* information about your rights when asked for identification or a DNA sample
* a discussion of grand juries, subpoenas, and FBI attempts to turn activists into informants.
To request free copies, call the National Lawyers Guild office at (212) 679-5100. You can also download the booklet at nlg.org (I also uploaded “Operation Backfire” here on GreenIsTheNewRed, as a backup).
And don’t forget the guild has a Green Scare Hotline at 888-NLG-ECOL (888-654-3265).The National Lawyers Guild has created a great new resource, “Operation Backfire: a... more
-
-
If you already don't eat animals, I don't recommend watching this because it is horrible.
If you do eat animals, or do not understand why people oppose the foie gras industry, please watch this video.If you already don't eat animals, I don't recommend watching this because it is... more
-
-
Several animal rescue organizations, specifically Animal Acres (as described below by Kinship Circle) and possibly Gentle Barn (below KC’s alert) and others, need help evacuating from the California wildfires. If you’re in or near the area and able to help, keep reading. Otherwise, please spread the word to those who can provide assistance. Please and thank you.
...
__
KINSHIP CIRCLE ANIMAL DISASTER AID NETWORK
8/30/09: Animal Acres Evacuates In The Path Of Calif. Fires
1. California Wildfires Move NW, Toward Animal Acres
2. Be On Emergency Standby With Animal Acres
3. Supplies/Equipment/Volunteers Needed For Animal Acres
Kinship Circle - 2009-08-30 - Animal Acres Evacuates in Path of CA Wildfires 01
Pets get help as flames approach: Rose Mary Berman of Palos Verdes Estates feeds a carrot to Norman one of 15 horses evacuated to Ernie Howlett Park in Rolling Hills Estates. Donna Littlejohn/Daily Breeze,
www.dailybreeze.com/latestnews/ci_13226056
============================
1. California Wildfires Move NW, Toward Animal Acres
8/29/09 - 8/30/09, PRESENT SITUATION / NOTES:
Fire moves toward Acton as officials hope for lower temperatures:
The strongest part of the Station fire burning in Angeles National Forest and La Canada Flintridge area is moving northwest of the park toward Acton, California, said Jennifer Sanchez of the U.S. Forest Service. [ANIMAL ACRES IS LOCATED IN ACTON]. Evacuations for some Acton residents are in place…
Since it began 8/26/09, the Station fire has burned 35,200 acres and prompted mandatory evacuations of 10,000 homes, according to Forest Service.
Kinship Circle - 2009-08-30 - Animal Acres Evacuates in Path of CA Wildfires 02
www.latimes.com/media/photo/2009-08/48663340.jpg
AUTHORIZED BY FRANK ALLEN, ANIMAL ACRES
Susie V Kaufman, Animal Acres Evacuation Coordinator
susie [at] jarrettlennon.com
8/30/09 — There is a mandatory evacuation in order on the northeast side of Acton. Animal Acres has begun the evacuation process. Currently, horses and donkeys are in the initial process of being moved from Animal Acres to Evacuation Site #2. The following is still only POSSIBLE: The next to be moved will be cows, followed by sheep, goats, and pigs, then birds. They will be moved to Evacuation Site #1. I know nothing about the emus.
============================
2. Be On Emergency Standby With Animal Acres
8/30/09 — Susie Kaufman writes: To be added to Animal Acres evacuation alert spreadsheet, email susie [at] jarrettlennon.com
- YOUR FULL NAME
- ALL PHONE NUMBERS
- EMAIL ADDRESS
- WHAT TYPE HELP YOU CAN OFFER (i.e., transportation, handling, soothing, temporary shelter, food and water [and containers], etc.)
To be included in a special list of others to contact in case of such an emergency evacuation, please let me know that, as well. The more who can be involved quickly, the better for our animal friends: susie [at] jarrettlennon.com
============================
3. Supplies/Equipment/Volunteers Needed For Animal Acres
8/30/09 — Susie V Kaufman, Animal Acres Evacuation Coordinator, writes: This list is incomplete, because Frank Allen is physically herding the donkeys and horses right this minute…
URGENT NEEDS FOR ANIMAL ACRES:
* Trucks
* Trailers
* Pickup trucks with camper shells (for the birds)
* Carriers for the birds (chickens, turkeys, etc.)
* Large water bowls
* People good with herding (we don’t want hysterics)
* Animal soothers
* Bedding
* Food
* Water hoses
CALL BEFORE SHOWING UP AT ANIMAL ACRES — 661-212-4647
PLEASE CALL before you make the drive, as events can/will change faster than emails and phone calls can be transmitted — 661-212-4647
DO NOT CALL 661-212-4647 for additional info; this is to be used only if you need up-to-the-secondSeveral animal rescue organizations, specifically Animal Acres (as described below by... more
-
-
...
Animal Liberation is Human Liberation. Humans are animals. Accepting these first two sentences is critical not only to aid other animals, but to create a framework that will most efficiently lead to the evolution of humanity. However, this seems to be something very difficult for people to grasp, even from the most passionate of backgrounds.
...
While some acknowledge that other animals deserve to be treated with "respect" they still seek to support their commodification and exploitation through food, clothing, testing, and so forth (therefore missing the meaning of "respect" entirely).
Let's start by dissecting some of this reasoning people use of why nonhuman animals should have to wait and the hypocrisy involved in these reasons. I will not go into the longer explanations of these, but simply seek to address how they specifically interact with other movements these people do support.
BIOLOGY. Biology has been used as an excuse against humans and other animals since before any study of biology existed. Skin color (a trait that is purely biological) is a reasoning people use for someone being inferior in other ways, even if they are not relevant to the biology of skin color. Gender and sexuality, things that are both biological and social constructs, are other things that people have used- claiming women are weaker and irrational, ignoring that there are more than two genders, and claiming that non-heterosexuality is some form of disease. All of these things are using one biological frame of reference for the worth of another human being.
This is also what humans are doing to other animals. Anti-animal rightsists go against their own belief systems in claiming that the biology of other animals makes them less worthy than ourselves. They use humans and only humans as a (speciesist) starting point for measures of intelligence, skill, and worth. For instance, one study put out recently showed that dogs were "as smart as 2 year old children". The study showed that dogs had the language abilities of 2 year olds, the arithmetic abilities of 4 year olds, and the social lives of teenagers. Still, they moved the intelligence measure to that of human language- 2 years- despite the fact that they have lives much richer and more intelligent as well as have other abilities and senses that far outweigh humans. Another study showed that animals have the ability to appreciate various types of music. This is one excuse people have used for years that separates us from other animals- art appreciation. There are species of animals whose memory capabilities far outweigh that of any human, and even though memory is a construct of human intelligence, we ignore this attribute in other animals because it does not fit our own reference of domination. The instances are endless. Animals have all of the same brain areas we do allowing them to have similar experiences, they just have less of them. This however, is not reason to use their biology as an excuse to treat them as commodities (whether we are nice to them or not).
RELIGION. Let's pretend for a moment that I believe in religion. Some religions give man dominion over other animals while others hold some species of animals to be sacred. To be brief, these religious texts also said many things that were oppressive towards women, other races, sexualities, and so on. So, to take what they say about animals as rock-hard truth while being able to toss out the massive prejudices placed against women, races, nationalities, other religions, and so on is simply irrational, and convenient for those who seek to exploit other animals.
POLITICAL/SOCIAL. Quite frequently, I hear that we can help the animals only when we have fixed everything going wrong with humans. The big misconceptions here are that humans and animals are separate entities...
Full article at link...
Animal Liberation is Human Liberation. Humans are animals. Accepting these... more
-
-
With the economy being at its lowest since The Great Depression of the late 1920's and 30's, Americans are looking for ways to cut costs and maximize their dollar. Veganism is the practice of abstaining from all animal products and by-products and avoiding products that test on animals or exploit animals for entertainment (zoos, circuses, aquariums, rodeos, etc.) In this case, the vegan diet specifically will help your family eat healthily and save a bundle.
It's often thought that to eat healthy, you must dole out a huge wad of cash for your daily digs. But this is simply untrue if you are smart about it. Of course, it's cheap to sustain yourself (temporarily) on a 99-cent box of Mac and Cheese product but we all know that for maximum health maybe the processed Kraft product isn't the best solution. Enter the whole foods approach to great prices!!
Meat and dairy can be expensive items and when you look at the standard American diet, you will see these things are not just luxuries, but staples. Cheaper alternatives include dried beans, peas, and lentils, tofu, grain products, and of course, fruits and vegetables. And don't think these are boring, these things only take a little creativity to turn into wonderful meals.
Dried legumes are inexpensive and a variety of dishes can be made from them. Soups, stews, refried beans, bean salads, dips, burritos, and curries are just the tip of the iceberg. There are so many interesting meals that you can fashion out of the often overlooked bean. At a local Smart & Final store you can find a ten-pound bag of dried pinto beans for under $10 and on sale at about $5. These beans, when soaked and boiled, become twice the size of their original form. Just imagine how many meals you can make from a ten-dollar, ten-pound bag of beans!
Grain products like rice, barley, pasta, couscous, and quinoa are all really cheap, especially if you buy them in bulk. Look for a local store that has bulk bins where you package the dry product yourself (Whole Foods Markets, health food shops, and Asian and Middle Eastern stores are great places to look for these.)
Fruits and vegetables may be expensive sometimes, especially if you opt for organic produce, but you can still save money if you buy a few fresh items and the rest from the frozen variety. You can get so much more frozen broccoli for a lower price than fresh. Berries can be quite pricey, but their frozen counterpart is easily doable and makes for great smoothies, or simply set out to thaw for dessert toppings.
If you go vegan and you don't rely on overpriced meat-substitutes you will see results not just in your bank account but also in terms of how you feel. Not to mention that vegan diets are better for the animals and our streams, soil, and air.
Provided is a relatively simple and cheap recipe for vegan refried beans that you can make for burritos, tacos, a dip for chips, or just eat coupled with some rice and hot sauce.
Delicioso, vegano, frijoles refritos:
(Yields about 6 cups of refried beans)
2 cups dried pinto beans (about 1 pound)
1 can of beer or 1-1/2 cups veggie broth if you're a teetotaler
1 tsp. salt
2 tsp. ground cumin
hot sauce, to taste
For dried beans, you must reconstitute them and then cook them for them to be edible. The following may sound difficult but you will get the hang of it quickly. You have two options. Firstly, you may sort through them, picking out any small stones or twigs, then place them in a large pot and add water until there are a few inches of water above the beans. Let them hang out while you go to work. They are best left to soak for 6-10 hours. Second method is to sort the beans then place them in a pot with several inches of water above the beans and bring to a boil. Boil for two minutes, then turn off heat, cover, and let sit for 2 hours. After the initial soaking or boiling time, it's time to drain and rinse the beans... full article at linkWith the economy being at its lowest since The Great Depression of the late 1920's and... more
-
-
WASHINGTON – Scientific advancements in medical testing may reduce the need for animal subjects, eliminating the heated debate without another fight.
Although scientists are already carrying out many of the alternatives in major research, some believe there is still plenty of room for progress.
Dr. John Pippin, senior medical and research adviser of the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, said animal experimentation should be completely banned for medical reasons as well as for the obvious ethical concerns.
According to Pippin, animal testing for human conditions can be misleading, and even dangerous, as the human anatomy is different from other animals – even our closest relatives – the great apes.
“There have been at least 85 successful vaccines to either cure or prevent HIV infection in animal models, mostly in monkeys,” said Pippin, a cardiologist. “Those vaccines… have been tested in approximately 200 human clinical trials. They have all failed.”
Additionally, Pippin said a recent trial conducted by Merck showed that people who received HIV vaccines that were originally tested on animals were more likely to contract HIV after taking the vaccine than people who took the placebo.
“That is fundamental proof that you’re on the wrong track,” said Pippin.
Theodora Capaldo, president of the New England Anti-Vivisection Society, also known as NEAVS, said many people have the dangerous misconception that experimenting on animals such as chimpanzees, who share many genetic similarities with humans, will help find cures for human-related ailments. In reality, Capaldo said he believes if animal experimentation was outlawed, humans would benefit.
“Yes, the genetic similarities between Homo sapiens and chimpanzees is even as little a difference as 2 to 3 percent, but it is enormous when it come to how disease occurs, progresses and what the outcome is,” Capaldo said.
Looking at HIV for example, Capaldo said chimpanzees are extremely poor models for testing for human cures. Chimpanzees cannot contract HIV, but only a virus similar to it. Additionally, because of our genetic differences, what does not effect a chimpanzee adversely may cause critical harm to a human.
And the evidence doesn’t stop there.
“There are more than two dozen cures for diabetes in animals; there is nothing successful in people,” Pippin said.
Once a professor of medicine at Harvard University, Pippin testified before the FDA and the Institute of Medicine in 2005 on the repercussions of animal experimentation, stating that such research led to life-threatening products, such as Vioxx, being released on the market.
Pippin admitted to once using animal models, mostly dogs, in his cardiovascular research. However, he stopped using them, he said, once he realized that caninesweren’t the most reliable models when trying to discover new ways to help people.
Fortunately, Pippin said there are many new, more humane and effective ways to conduct research. For example – using stem cells.
“You can already create human cell cultures and tissues that can be used for testing drugs in a way that’s more accurate than animal testing,” he said.
Additionally, Pippin said scientists can use microdosing, where humans are administered low, non-life threatening doses of a chemical that are still high enough to study how it is effective on a cellular level. The goal is to figure out what dose of a certain chemical should be added to new drugs.
In-vitro testing is also a popular alternate method, where human cells are placed in a test tube or Petri dish along with a chemical of choice to measure everything from toxicity to effectiveness.
These are only a few examples of the new and improved research methods, according to Pippin.
But not everyone agrees.
...full article at link.WASHINGTON – Scientific advancements in medical testing may reduce the need for... more
-
-
By Sharon L.. Peters, Special for USA TODAY
He was too old (maybe 8, maybe 10), too big (a rangy 83 pounds) and, truth be told, sort of goofy looking. He was no one's idea of the perfect dog to take home.
But I was riveted from the moment I saw him happily waving his huge tail back and forth like a welcome banner as a noisy band of kids he didn't know poked and tugged and climbed all over him at the animal shelter.
Then he trained his whiskey-colored eyes on the center of my soul. I was hooked.
It scared me, this instant connection with a dog that surely wouldn't live more than two or three or four years. I wasn't altogether sure, since it had been only six months since I'd had to put down my beloved old Buck, that I'd be able to face it again so soon.
That was four years ago this month, and for 3½ years, that dog, my late Rufus, devoted all of his remaining seconds on earth to spreading his gentle love across every mile he covered.
No dog could have been more perfect.
Perfect. That's how my friend Caryn describes Al, a sweet-tempered Hurricane Katrina survivor, her enthusiastic walking and road-trip buddy. Caryn made Al's acquaintance just before Christmas 2005. She immediately understood that young Al had no intention of living a limited life just because he'd lost a leg in the chaotic aftermath of the storm, and she had no interest in convincing him otherwise. Now she's sort of startled when people ask what happened to the leg. She forgets he's a tri-pawed.
And I can promise you the couple who adopted Mocha, a patrician chocolate Lab who spent months at the shelter where I volunteer, have no regrets about choosing her. Mocha was 7 when they took her home, and she was nearly blind from diabetes. She was also irrepressible — she loves all creatures, adapts quickly, and quivers with joy when she picks up the scent of a fox she can track through the tall grass. Life is good for everyone at her house.
The folks at Petfinder.com, which lists homeless animals from 12,656 shelters and rescue groups, are hoping to spur more interest in the likes of Rufus and Al and Mocha, pets that are never the first chosen, pets that languish for months (if they're lucky enough to land where there's sufficient space to give them some extra time).
They've designated Wednesday as Adopt-A-Less-Adoptable-Pet Day and are working to help promote the animals that for any of a variety reasons don't top anyone's most-wanted list.
In some case these are animals that might be older, or have a health issue or a completely fixable training issue like over-exuberance or leash-tugging. In some cases, says Betsy Saul, founder of Petfinder.com, which boasts 1.5 million adoptions annually, they may simply have the misfortune of being "a black dog lost in a sea or many black dogs in the shelter" or "might be a little shy in that environment."
A Petfinder survey, in fact, found that 96% of responding shelters and rescues said they have at least one, sometimes many adoptable pets for which they're having extreme difficulty finding homes; 43% said some have been there for one year or more.
"This just isn't right," says Saul. "We're all aware that they're great pets."
But the reality is, many people aiming to adopt think only puppy or kitten. "So what we have here is an issue of marketing," says Saul, a need to communicate that while kittens and puppies are wonderful, and may be the right choice for many, they're not the be-all, end-all for everyone who wants a great companion.
Older animals are usually house-trained, generally more mellow, have mature bladders and "know what the deal is" when it comes to making a mutually agreeable life with humans, Saul says.
When you get into the category of not just older, but senior, many people have deep reservations. "People are afraid of loss," she says... more at linkBy Sharon L.. Peters, Special for USA TODAY
He was too old (maybe 8, maybe 10), too... more
-
