Save the Fluffies
fried at aesops.force9.co.uk
Thu Dec 17 19:09:00 EST 1998
On Thu, 17 Dec 1998 22:00:52 -0000, "Secret Celebrity"
<secretceleb at innocent.com> wrote:
>>The most abusrd and telling point is that the ALF must be right to indulge
>>in such publicity stunts,.....it seems to be the only thing which raises
>>many peoples' awareness of the issues.....and I find our population
>>amazingly hypocritical about the whole thing.
>How many people buying meat would be prepared to slaughter, gut and dissect
>the carcasses of the animals in question?
Well I've done it.
>How many people who use pharmaceuticals or household products would be
>prepared to shave domestic animals and apply electrodes and caustic patches
>to various parts of their bodies?
>Industrialised societies work on the premise that each individual is
>employed within a given role.
>'Cruel' acts take place is because it is someone's job to carry them out.
>The fact that many of us find them so stomach wrenching is neither here nor
>there. The populace will *still* buy products which at some point have
>involved animal cruelty, and payment to the individuals who actually carried
>out the 'cruel' act is absorbed in the price of the product.
>Blowing scientists houses up is not going to change these simple facts.
>Think it over.
I have. Blowing scientists' houses up obviously does change these simple
facts. I even had a very interesting lift once with somebody who owned a
LARGE business producing electronic control systems for battery farms, etc.,
who had been bombed out of one factory and was livid with the animal rights
movement. Definitely changed his view on things, and God was he attentive to
animalwellbeing. Hated ALF's guts though.....
I don't personally agree with this "terrorism". Doesn't blind me to the very
real positive effect it has overall. Instead of going on about it, prove the
"terrorists" wrong and show that real change can be achieved quickly by
More information about the Neur-sci