ARAN Supports PETA's KFC Campaign

by Jay Mon Jul 30, 2007 22:33

Personally I don't like the way PETA and the like are trying to shock and horrify people into not eating meat. There must be a better method of getting your message across than upseting ordinary people on the street who just want some fried chicken?! And I wouldn't go near KFC chicken anyway, it's full of grease and fat.

by wageslave Tue Jul 31, 2007 00:58

They are just showing people how their "food" gets to them and the consequences of eating that particular "food".

The only reason it is upsetting is because what happens IS upsetting.

Some people seem to want to pretend that nothing nasty is done in their name and get angry at PETA for pointing out uncomfortable facts and the ethical consequences of their actions.

PETA are not the ones doing the wrong here. They are just making people aware of the cruel things businesses like KFC get up to in order to maximise profits. By supporting these businesses, you are supporting their cruel practices.

Keep up the good work PETA and ARAN

by veggie Tue Aug 14, 2007 15:25 sweetwetone at gmail dot com

just emailed you guys right now to get more involved in ur work

by S.Tee Tue Aug 14, 2007 16:46

I spent one night working in a chicken farm in westmeath when i was in college. Our job was to move the chickens from the warehouse they were fed in, onto crates driven in and out of the warehouse on forklifts, and then loaded on to trucks. I seen chickens kicked around like footballs, their necks snapped by workers when closing the drawers of crates, and forklifts driving over them & bursting them like balloons etc. I remember vomiting 2 or 3 times during the night.. no idea how people do this for a living.
Plus these were all daily occurences i was told and brought good amusement to a few members of the workforce, so the cruelty spreads basically to all chicken farming.. although KFC seems to bring things to new extremes.

by andy wallace Tue Jun 24, 2008 04:34

what is the point of being at the top of the food chain if we cannot eat the things below us?
Besides that, what isthe point of saving chickens? what is their contribution to society? are they daving the planet? are they providing us with new modes of less environment-harming vehicles? They have to reason to be on this earth. God sees all men as equal, not animal...that is why he placed us at top. Maybe instead of trying to get worthless chickens to live, you try to find a way to better something that matters. Such as finding cures for diseases and finding a way to end Global warming.

by rogy Tue Jun 24, 2008 15:11

Hi S.Tee,

Can you clarfiy that you worked at the 'farm end' of this process and not at the 'slaughterhouse end'? In other words, you were sending chickens off to the slaughterhouse on lorries rather than receiving them at the slaughterhouse. Is that right?

thanks - rogy

by Alx [INC] Mon Aug 25, 2008 08:36

THAT is exactly why i hate peta with a passion. I love their cause dont get me wrong but the way to go about doing it is terrible. Yes they should make the information available to you, but forcing it in your face isnt. I cant say how many concerts or other events ive been to and walked past their booth and have a video of a chicken being boiled alive, or a cow being tortured thrown in my face. What right do they have to do this to people. One time i was at a carnival type thing with my FOUR year old niece who was eating a chicken sandwhich and we walked past their booth with the kfc video playing of course she stopped and looked at it and before i realized what it actually was she was bawling. And the only thing the peta dick had to say was"maybe now she will make the right decision" Took all i had in me not to slug him right there

by Pigeon Displacement Mon Aug 25, 2008 11:20

I didn't think pouring water over London Mayor Red Ken "pigeons are rats with wings" Livingstone during a press conference in NYC on public transport was the greatest of PETA's acts.

Livingston's offence to PETA at that juncture was not renewing the permit to the family that sells pigeon food to tourists in London'sTrafalger Square in order to cut down on the cleaning bill to statues (yes we know the provos had another approach to cutting costs on cleaining the Nelson statue in O'Connel St. in '66) and surrounds.

This initiative by Livingstone could hardly be perceived as "pigeon genocde". Put yourself in the pigeon's place. No food here on the cement, I think I'll fly to a park and try my luck there.

Peta's approach is too much grab attention by shock (see similar ineffectvce tactics employed by some anti-abortionists & anti-war people). This approach relies on the guilt trip as motivator (see AA's analysis on guilt)

by Spinning Quickly Mon Aug 25, 2008 20:20

Looking at it either way, Ken Livingston was in a no-win situation WRT PETA - granting or not granting a licence could have been interpreted as cruelty to animals by that group of fanatics.