Worldwide Anti-McDonalds Day Demo - Sunday 15th October
CM | 14.09.2006 19:53 | Animal Liberation | Ecology | Globalisation
Worldwide Anti McDonalds Day Demo on Sunday, 15th October. Bring your friends, fancy dress, or just yourself! Meeting at 12 midday, Leicester Square McDonalds.
CM
e-mail:
info@vegancampaigns.org.uk
Homepage:
http://www.vegancampaigns.org.uk
Additions
Data for McDonald's leaflets
15.09.2006 14:02
http://www.mcspotlight.org . The CIA has gotten McDonald's
into over 100 countries.
. The US Commerce Dept has stolen
money from the poor to run ads
for the world's biggest unionbuster
and mammal butcher through the
Market Promotion Program which pays for overseas commercials.
. The US Treasury has paid many of
McDonald's summer employees.
. Charles Griffis and another black
franchiser in separate lawsuits have sued the chain
for practices such as not allowing
black franchisers to buy in white
areas
. McDonald's promotes obesity through the tens of
billions it has spent on tv and radio advertising.
. Others pay for the health care costs
generated by McDonald's carcinogenic
heart attack producing food
. While Burger King has a veggie burger
Taco Bell has a vegan burrito and
Subway has admittedly a pathetic
salad sandwich, dinosaur McDonald's provides
no veggie burger in the US. Suppliers
like Swift supply animal flesh.
. McDonald's chief supply of flesh
is old or infertile young dairy cows.
What is in their flesh?
Blood, trioxypurine, adrenalin, cholesterol, prions, fecal
matter, colon bacteria, toxoplasmosis, trichinosis, insecticides, female hormones, antibiotics, mercury, arsenic, chromium, polychlorinated biphenols, no vitamin C,
no natural bulk, senility, sterility, cancer, anthrax, lead, Mad Cow, Mad Deer, impotence, fly dung, smallpox, tularemia
Alzheimer's, alcoholism, addiction, salmonella
. McDonald's promotes war by advertising on warjock
chickenhawk programs.
. McDonald's and other fleshmongers cause more
annual deaths than tobacco, alcohol, traffic accidents
and war combined.
. A Mexican union of 86,000 members
held out for 2 months before
the Mexican government and the
CIA got McDonald's into that country.
. McDonald's gave 1 million to Richard
Nixon and in return he exempted
the corporation from minimum wage.
Congress later overturned the
legislation.
. Fast food places have been
higher magnets for crime.
. McDonald's litter is scattered for
miles around its outlets, clogging
streams.
. While most countries want a fit
military, McDonald's has had
monopoly contracts at some US
military bases.
. The attorneys general of California,
New York and Texas have sued
McDonald's in the past for
its falsehoods in claiming nutrition.
. National Public Radio overtaken
by US regime propaganda arm
Radio Free Europe's Kevin Klose
owns 200 million in McDonald's stock
which has further eroded NPR
honest coverage of the flesh industry.
. Mutual and pension funds undemocratically
invested in McDonald's in violation
of the beliefs of many of their members
have lost billions for their members.
. McDonald's has had five straight
quarter losses, as the number of
young becoming vegans multiplies
geometrically, as news of Mad Cow
Disease grows.
. The speed of slaughter in McDonald's slaughterhouses
has many side effects.
http://www.wvec.com/news/local/mcchicken_head.htm . Vegetarian groups were awarded a
minuscule
ten million dollars for proving that
McDonald's fries were preprocessed
in sheep tallow.
If you wish to adopt 1 or several
McDonald's to leaflet, fortune cookie
sized strips are cheap to produce
(5 to 12 to a page) and easy to
slip under windshields.
Those who have endorsed at least 1 of the many McDonald's boycotts
since 1983 include Mpfo Tutu, Martin Sheen, Jane Goodall, Dick Gregory, Ralph Nader, former Representative Ron Dellums, former Chief Rabbi of Ireland David Rosen, and over 10,000 organizations
in several coalitions.
McDonald's Boycotter
Homepage:
http://www.mcspotlight.org
Comments
Hide the following 11 comments
no to mcdonalds, yes to meat!!!
15.09.2006 10:24
Jo the ex veggie
how about alternative meat resources
15.09.2006 10:26
how about having a hot dog stand and a burger van outside mcdonalds selling burgers and hots dogs for cheaper than mcdonalds?? thats more like it....
Roger
Nice one Roger and Badger!
15.09.2006 10:35
Sai ko JO
ha ha ha!!
16.09.2006 11:18
Classic!!!
You Dumbass!!
jo the veggie
Carry on eating meat, I can't stop you
16.09.2006 12:37
And you still haven't replied to my questions I put on the other thread, I would be grateful if you did address the very pertinent questions I have raised.
Carry on eating meat, I cannot stop you. Hideous practices in slaughterhouses will not deter you I know, but perhaps when you are older and (regrettably) develop heart disease or another of a host of associated illnesses to do with regular meat consumption, then you will see the wisdom perhaps behind my words, and those of others here too.
Badger
bodger
16.09.2006 13:47
but to sum up: the category of human and that of animal are different. there can be no equality in any meaningful sense between, say, a rat and a human. i am all for better care of animals, but animal rights as such do not exist, as the idea of rights is a legal concept, and requires a state to enforce it, and citizens to understand it. A cat cannot understand the idea of 'rights'. Do animals suffer? yes, but the suffering of a few rats is justified to fight cancer. the death of a cow is justified to satisfy our hunger and our health. What more do you want?
but i agree, dont eat at mcdonalds, because it is a multinational, not because they sell meat products.
sai ko jo
huh, so listen
16.09.2006 19:18
No doubt Sai ko jo you sell the socialist worker paper and try to hoodwink others into joining the worthless trotsky left?
This is probably the limit to your activism, correct me if I'm wrong.
No wonder you are pissed off and annoyed you inneffective whinging asshole!
Animal rights activists shut down lab animal breeders, stop shops selling fur/ foie gras/ veal/ , disrupt the supply chain to vivisection labs, sink ships that abuse animals at sea, stop bumpkins murdering our wildlife in the countryside plus perform a multitude of effective actions outside of the law that you bow your sorry ass head to jo.
If I was as dumb as you I also would be constantly trying to slur active groups via indymedia to make myself feel of more worth.
Good on you you twat! Keep it up!
Masked_Up_For_Life
Refuting Psycho Joe's points.
17.09.2006 03:00
Well that's bloody obvious, but what do you define by equality? As sentient beings, animals and people both qualify. As having instincts, animals and people are equal. As expressing hunger, pain, cold and a host of other sensations and emotions, animals and humans are equal. In terms of intellect no of course theyare not equal, but then again does that necessarily make humankind inherently superior? Look at the world we live in for Christ's sake, as well as events in the last century. Not superior, but having more power to dominate and to control the environment, that is what having an intellect has given human beings, sometimes for the worse rather than the better.
"i am all for better care of animals, but animal rights as such do not exist, as the idea of rights is a legal concept, and requires a state to enforce it, and citizens to understand it."
Following this argument then it could be said that human rights are nothing but a legal concept. This is in effect true, atlhough many religions would argue otherwise. Civilised citizens should understand human rights, otherwise the state would not have to enforce them, but they do not.
" Do animals suffer? yes, but the suffering of a few rats is justified to fight cancer. the death of a cow is justified to satisfy our hunger and our health. What more do you want? "
Drugs tested on animals ostensibly to promote human health have gone on to actually CAUSE CANCER psycho. I could cite evidence for this and other animal tested drug disasters, if I did so I'd be here all day.
As for the death of a cow, you can use this identical argument to justify cannibalism, but be that as it may, a vegetarian diet with more land given over to growing vegetables rather than grazing cattle produces far, far more food for humanity.
Badger
refuting badger and others
17.09.2006 06:59
your point is this: all animals suffer and so in this we are all equal. But we do not share any ways of communication or thought or language with animals. it is hard to imagine what the suffering of a beatle could be,say. even animal rights activists are forced to use pictures of 'cute' animals, rabbits, etc that can be identified with human babies. in other words, you are forced to 'anthropomorphise' animals, that is pretend they are human, in the same way kids fairy stories do. this is not scientific, to say the least. ( and also i noticed i was called 'dumbass' ie a stupid donkey, more anthropomorphism from the animal rights community) i also do not think any animal rights activist would try and smash down a labatory that was testing on lice, say. furthermore, in many cases animals and nature clash with the interests of humanity. ie. rats and diseases, flies, mosquitos etc etc and of course, it would be impossible to tell a tiger not to eat meat as it is hurting the deer. it is incomprehensible to communicate it to the tiger.
it is a fact that in many cases humanity and other forms of life cannot live as 'equals'. As such, it is good to get rid of unecessary cruelty, ie testing for perfumes,etc, but there are some things where it is a non issue, meat eating, killing disease carrying vermin etc.
i think the difference is that i do not think suffering makes things ( animals and humans whatever) equal. we all suffer, so what? this is more like some eastern religion than politics.
as to the anti marxist diatrible and the idea that you guys do stuff, while marxists like me just surf the net. welll?? just action without any thought is stupidity ( shoot first and ask questions later). i have not seen nor heard of any kind of serious thought in the actions of animal rights activists.it is just as you say, action action without thinking.
sai ko jo
Empathy and experience, not hard science
17.09.2006 22:34
"Animals can suffer as much as human beings, their emotions and sensitivity are often stronger than those of a human being. Various philosophers and religious leaders try to convince their disciples and followers that animals are often machines without a soul, and without feelings. However anyone who has lived with an animal, be it a dog, a bird or even amouse, knows that this is theory is a brazen lie, invented to justify cruelty."
Isaac Bashevis Singer (1904 -1991), Nobel Laureate, whose family was murdered at Auschwitz, from 'The foreword to Vegetarianism' by Dudley Giehl.
No animals and humans are not the same in terms of intellect, but that does not mean that they don't suffer. Without knowing it you are espousing a Cartesian view of the world which is ahang up from Enlightenment science. Animals do suffer, and we should not take their lives as casually as we do today. This should only be done as a last resort, when there is absolutely no other option available. Ultimately it is not what we do, but why we do it, the deeper reaons behind it. We should hurt rather than maim, and main rather than kill, for all life is precious, nor can any be replaced.
Perhaps you would find this attitude towards the world naive Psycho, personally I feel that it is far better than many theories from science today,(remember the scientist Malthus Psycho, whom you quoted?) some of which justify man's inhumanity to man and the degredation of the environment and its creatures. If more people had this attitude, then the world would also not be in the shit state that it is currently in.
Badger
science and empathy
18.09.2006 07:45
Thank you for your clarity. You have hit the nail on the head. I am aware of holding ' cartesian enlightenment' views, because i believe they are correct. It is those views,beliefs, and ideologies that claim to break from these views that i find misguided. Why? because you give up reason, and have to rely on feelings, empathy etc furthermore the emphasis on different religions etc is for me deeply reactionary. i think this is why for me, meat eating is a non issue (animals do not share our rationality) and for you it is, ( we can empathise with the suffering of others, and in our suffering we are equal). what more can be said??? there is no meeting point between our ways of thinking.... that said, however, i can see ecology is important, precisesly on the basis of 'science'. i do not find 'deep ecology' convincing, but i think bookchin's 'social ecology' is quite brilliant. anyway,
sai ko jo